THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 
OF  CALIFORNIA 


• 


IN  MEMORY  OF 
ALEXANDER  GOLDSTEIN 


LETTERS 


TO  THE 


HON.  WILLIAM    JAY, 


BEING 


A  REPLY  TO  HIS  "  INQUIRY 


INTO  THE 


AMERICAN    COLONIZATION 


AND 


AMERICAN  ANTI-SLAVERY  SOCIETIES." 


BY    DAVID    M.    REESE,    M.    D. 

OF  NEW- YORK. 


PUBLISHED  BY  LEAVITT,  LORD  &  Co. 

180    BROADWAY. 
BOSTON  :— CROCKER  <fc  BREVVSTER 

1835. 


UOAN  STACK 


f 


[Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  by  DAVID  M.  REESE,  M.  D.  in  the  cterk's 
office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District  of  New-York.] 


Stereotyped  by  Conner  &  Cooke. 


'  7  7 

J\ 


RECOMMENDATIONS. 


From  the  Rev.  John  Breckinridge,  President  of  the  Young  Men's  Co 
lonization  Society  of  Pennsylvania. 

NEW-YORK,  May  13,  1835. 

I  have  examined  with  much  interest  and  satisfaction,  the  proof 
sheets  of  the  chief  parts  (the  whole  being  not  quite  complete)  of  Dr. 
Reese's  "  Letters  to  the  Hon.  Wm.  Jay,"  in  reply  to  his  late  work 
against  the  American  Colonization  Society. 

Dr.  Reese  has  largely  merited  the  thanks  of  the  American  people, 
for  the  prompt  and  satisfactory  manner  in  which  he  has  refuted  and 
exposed  a  work,  which,  upon  a  momentous  and  agitating  question, 
and  under  an  imposing  name,  has  said  more  disingenuous,  sophistical, 
and  yet  dangerous  things,  than  I  had  supposed  it  possible  to  be  uttered 
in  so  small  a  compass,  by  so  honest,  so  good,  and  so  sensible  a  man. 

JOHN  BRECKINRIDGE. 


From  the  Rex.  Drs.  Milnor,  Broivnlee,  and  De  Witt.. 

DEAR  SIR, — Having  been  favoured  with  the  opportunity  of  reading 
the  proof  sheets  of  a  large  portion  of  your  answer  to  the  recent  publi 
cation  of  the  Hon.  William  Jay,  assailing  the  principles  and  proceed 
ings  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,  we  beg  leave  to  express 
our  approbation  of  the  views  which  you  have  presented ;  and  to  add, 
that,  in  our  opinion,  you  have  very  successfully  defended  the  Institu 
tion  against  the  charges  in  the  book  referred  to,  exposed  the  mistakes 
and  errors  of  its  worthy  author,  and  presented  arguments  and  facts, 
as  we  conceive,  abundantly  sufficient  to  satisfy  every  impartial  mind 
of  the  preference  which  should  be  given  to  the  practical  operations 
now  in  successful  prosecution  by  the  friends  of  colonization,  for  the  re 
lief  of  a  distressed  class  of  our  fellow  men,  over  the  fruitless,  impracti 
cable,  and  dangerous  theories,  of  the  advocates  of  immediate  abolition. 

We  cheerfully  commend  your  work  to  the  public,  and  trust  its  ge 
neral  perusal  will  have  a  happy  effect  in  removing  unfavourable  im- 


s- 


IV  RECOMMENDATIONS. 

pressions,  and  in  increasing  the  interest  which  has  recently  been  so 
signally  manifested  in  the  cause  of  colonization. 

As  citizens  desiring  the  continuance  and  perpetuity  of  the.  peace 
security,  and  happy  union  of  our  beloved  country;  as  philanthropists 
anxious  to  promote  the  temporal  and  spiritual  welfare  of  the  people  oi 
colour,  both  bond  and  free  ;  as  Christians  willing  to  pray  and  labour 
for  the  extension  of  the  blessings  of  civilization  and  religion  to  be 
nighted  Africa  ;  we  do  earnestly  hope,  that  a  cause,  so  blessed  already 
by  a  benignant  Providence,  will  continue  to  grow  in  the  favour  of  thi- 
enlightened  community,  and  its  active  advocates  and  supporters  be 
furnished  by  its  liberality  with  the  means  of  accomplishing  their  be 
nevolent  and  noble  object. 

We  remain  your  Christian  friends  and  coadjutors, 

JAMES  MILNOR,  D.  D. 
WM.  C.  BROWNLEE,  D.  D. 
THOS.  DE  WITT,  D.  D. 
Dr.  DAVID  M.  REESE, 

New-  York,  May  18,  1835. 


from  the  Rev.  N.  Bangs,  Editor  of  the  Christian  Advocate  and  Journal. 

I  have  examined  the  Letters  of  Dr.  D.  M.  Reese,  addressed  to  the 
Hon.  William  Jay,  in  defence  of  the  American  Colonization  Society, 
and  in  opposition  to  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  and  believe  them  an 
ample  and  able  refutation  of  the  errors  of  the  latter,  as  exhibited  in 
Mr.  Jay's  unfortunate  book,  and  a  triumphant  as  well  as  timely  vin 
dication  of  the  principles  and  proceedings  of  the  American  Coloniza 
tion  Society ;  and  therefore  most  heartily  and  cordially  recommend 
these  Letters  to  the  careful  perusal  and  serious  consideration  of  the 
American  public. 

NATHAN  BANGS,  D.  D. 

New-York,  May  18,  1835. 


PREFACE. 


ON  the  appearance  of  the  "  Inquiry1'  of  the  Hon.  Mr.  Jay,  into  the 
American  Colonization  and  American  Anti-Slavery  Societies,  I  eager 
ly  procured  a  copy,  and  read  it  throughout  with  mingled  emotions  of 
pain  and  pleasure.  I  was  pained  that  so  worthy  a  man  should  exhibit 
such  evidence  of  ignorance  of  the  subject  on  which  he  undertakes  to 
enlighten  the  public;  and  still  more,  that  such  a  man  should  descend 
from  the  dignity  of  his  profession  and  character,  to  assail  and  satirize 
many  of  the  ablest  and  best  men  of  this  nation,  and  that  noblest  enter 
prise  of  human  benevolence,  to  which  the  American  Colonization  So 
ciety  is  consecrated  ;  and  this  too  on  such  questionable  authorities,  as 
those  on  which  alone,  he  seems  to  have  been  dependent  for  his  state 
ments.  But  I  found  pleasure  in  this  renewed  demonstration,  that  the 
Colonization  scheme,  though  assailed  by  another  of  the  champions 
among  its  foes,  a  man  of  talents,  learning,  and  piety  too,  is,  neverthe 
less,  so  firmly  erect  upon  the  im.noveable  foundation  of  light,  and  love, 
and  truth ;  that  it  comes  forth  from  this  fiery  ordeal,  <:  like  gold  seven 
times  tried,"  and  retains  all  its  brilliancy,  purity,  and  strength,  untar 
nished  by  the  process,  and  triumphing  in  its  own  native  and  heaven- 
born  sublimity. 

Such  were  my  impressions  when  I  had  finished  its  perusal ;  and  a 
similar  estimate  of  the  utter  impotency  of  the  book,  is,  I  have  since 
learned,  very  generally  entertained,  by  those  of  our  fellow  citizens, 
who  are  well  informed  in  relation  to  the  history  and  operations  of  the 
colonization  enterprise  I  therefore  felt  no  disposition  to  attempt  a 
reply,  for,  at  that  time.  I  confidently  believed  that  the  author  had 
furnished,  in  the  voluir: .•>  itself,  abundant  materials  for  his  own  refu 
tation.  I  think  so  still,  although  I  have  yielded  to  the  judgment  of 
others,  and  consented  again  to  engage  in  this  controversy.  I  feel  that 
I  have  no  other  qualification,  than  a  conscientious  attachment  to  the 
cause  of  colonization,  because  of  an  honest  and  deliberate  persuasion, 
that  it  is  one  of  supreme  irnivrrnnce  to  the  prosperity  of  my  own 
country;  of  unmingled  b^r^  nr>e  to  the  coloured  population  of  tin's 
"and.  whether  free  o:  ensl.y.-e.  .  and  of  ;  i  h  and  unspeakable  promise 
1* 


Vl  PREFACE. 

to  fallen,  degraded,  and  heathenish  Africa.  But  as  many  of  OUT 
friends,  who  agree  with  me  in  my  view  of  the  harmlessness  of  the 
assault,  which  Mr.  Jay's  book  contains,  express  their  apprehensions, 
lest  the  magic  of  Ms  name  upon  its  title  page,  may  mislead  the  "  un 
learned  and  unwary,"  and  that  multitudes  of  such  may  be  taught  to 
infer  from  our  silence,  that  we  cannot  or  dare  not  meet  this  "  giant" 
in  the  field  of  discussion,  they  have  judged  it  expedient,  from  these 
Considerations,  that  a  vindication  of  the  society  and  its  friends  from 
the  unjust  accusations  of  the  Eon.  Judge,  is  imperiously  called  for. 
and,  by  common  consent,  the  author  of  the  present  Letters  has  been 
urged  to  the  unwelcome  task. 

That  it  has  not  been  performed  by  another  and  an  abler  hand,  is 
not  less  a  matter  of  regret  to  myself,  than  it  can  be  to  others.  For 
although  I  do  not,  in  matters  of  conscience  and  duty,  quail  beneath 
the  frowns  of  any  foe,  nor  shrink  from  any  measure  of  obloquy  and 
reproach,  which  I  am  permitted  to  share  with  the  wisest  and  purest 
men  of  this  nation ;  yet,  with  the  evidence  of  the  spirit  and  temper  of 
the  present  race  of  abolitionists,  which  experience  has-  furnished, 
unless  a  man  is  doubly  strong  in  his  own  conscious  integrity  of  pur 
pose,  and  prepared  to  endure  the  revilings,  arid  brave  the  barkings  of 
the  whole  kennel  press,  hired  for  the  purpose ;  he  will  neither  seek 
nor  desire  a  conflict  with  such  antagonists  as  gather  around  almost 
every  anti-slavery  periodical.  It  is  perhaps  well,  however,  that  the 
party  should  be  taught,  in  the  present  case,  that  this  Goliath,  in  whom 
they  glory,  can  be  encountered  by  the  "  least  among  the  hosts  of  our 
Israel,"  and,  in  the  name  of  that  God  in  whom  we  trust  alone  for  the 
success  of  colonization,  I  go  forth  in  this  defensive  war. 

In  the  following  Letters,  it  has  been  my  design  to  treat  the  author 
with  all  proper  respect,  while  I  animadvert  upon  the  contents  of  his 
book,  with  the  same  freedom  with  which  he  has  treated  the  sentiment4 
of  colonizationists.  I  have  therefore  taken  up  the  several  chapters  ol 
his  whole  "  Inquiry,"  and  brought  into  view  each  of  his  prominent 
arguments,  and  the  authorities  on  which  he  places  most  reliance: 
and  in  correcting  his  numerous  mistakes,  and  exposing  the  contradic 
tions  and  inconsistencies  which  abound  in  the  volume,  I  have  not  de 
signedly,  in  any  instance,  charged  upon  him  an  intention  to  deceive, 
but  attribute  his  blunders  to  his  recent  associations,  which  have  led 
him  to  fallacious  sources  for  information,  and  perverted  his  own  mind. 
so  that,  on  this  particular  subject,  he  has  become  disqualified  for  sober- 
thinking.  And  in  offering  this  apology  for  the  author  of  the  Inquiry. 
which  in  candour  and  Christian  charity  is  his  due,  we  have  another 
striking  and  melancholy  proof  of  that  mental  and  moral  infatuation, 
which  affords  the  deplorable  evidence  that  the  imputation  of  "  fanati- 


PREFACE.  Vll 

cism,"  however  it  may  be  repelled  by  the  zealots  for  immediate  aboli 
tionism-,  is  nevertheless  neither  unmerited  nor  unfounded. 

Under  what  other  influence  save  that  of  pure  fanaticism,  could  an 
intelligent,  virtuous,  and  respectable  citizen,  gravely  affix  his  name  to 
a  book  containing  such  perversions  of  facts, — distortions  of  mean 
ings, — misquotations  of  authors, — direct  and  palpable  inconsisten 
cies. — disconnected  and'  incongruous  declamation,  and  such  illiberal 
censoriousness  towards  his  "  fellow  citizens  and  fellow  Christians," 
as  those  of  which  I  have  convicted  this  "  Inquiry"  of  the  Hon.  William 
Jayl  If  the  reader  can  excuse  or  explain  such  examples  as  those 
pointed  out  in  the  following  Letters,  in  any  milder  and  more  Christinn 
language  than  that  which  imputes  them  to  fanaticism,  I  shall  rejoice, 
that  it  may  ever  hereafter  be  adopted.  I  confess  for  myself,  that  this  is 
the  only  mantle  to  cover  them,  which  it  appears  to  me  is  furnished, 
even  from  the  wardrobe  of  CHARITY  itself. 

On  the  one  page  we  read,  that  the  whole  of  the  slaves  in  the  United 
Slates  are  "  kept  in  ignorance,  and  compelled  to  live  without  God,  and 
to  die  without  hope/'  And  on  another  we  are  told,  that  "  245,000"  of 
these  same  slaves  are  "  Christians,"  and  "possess  a  saving  knowledge 
of  the  religion  of  Christ !" 

At  onetime  the  Colonization  Society  is  charged  with  "professing  to 
be  a  remedy  for  slavery,  and  the  only  one:" — and  at  another,  it  is  de 
clared,  that  its  "professed  constitutional  object  is  exclusively  that  of 
colonizing  the  free  blacks  and  manumitted  slaves,  and  that  it  has  no 
more  right  to  meddle  with  slavery  or  emancipation,  than  a  Bible  So 
ciety  !"  On  one  page,  the  Colonization  Society  is  called  a  "  powerful 
institution"  and  on  another,  it  is  called  "  utterly  impotent."  a  "  v;eak, 
broken-winded,  good  for  nothing  team  .'" 

In  one  place  we  are  told,  first,  that  "'  the  Colonization  Society  is,  in  its 
general  influence,  decidedly  ANTI-CHRISTIAN  ;"  and  that  it  can  (:  in  no 
sense  be  termed  a  religious  society ;"  and  on  the  same  page,  it  is  said 
that  this  Colonization  Society  contains  "multitudes  of  religious  men." 
And  again.  "The  Colonization  Society  unquestionably  comprises  a 
•vast  member  of  as  PURE  AND  DEVOTED  CHRISTIANS,  as  can  be  found  in 
this  or  any  other  country  !" 

But  if  this  be  not  unsophisticated  fanaticism,  let  me  ask  the  reader 
to  affix  a  softer  name  to  the  attempt  here  made  by  a  good  man,  to  ap 
propriate  the  sentiments  and  language  of  his  own  father  to  the  support 
of  the  scheme  of  immediate  abolition,  when  that  father,  distinguished 
as  he  was  for  benvolence  to  every  class  of  his  fellow  beings,  expressed 
those  sentiments  and  that  language  distinctly  in  behalf  of  gradual 
abolition,  of  which  "  gradualism"  he  continued  an  unwavering  advo- 
eatCj  as  the  extracts  from  his  writings  conclusively  show. 


VW  PREFACE. 

But  in  the  reference  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  made  in  several  parts  of  Mr, 
Jay's  book,  his  sentiments  are  so  palpably  perverted  from  the  connex 
ion  and  design  in  which  they  were  expressed,  that  no  other  evidence 
is  necessary,  to  convict  the  author  of  fanaticism,  or  wickedness,  and 
the  former  only  is  insinuated,  than  we  have  in  the  following  sentence 
from  his  writings. 

"  Nothing  is  more  certainly  written  in  the  book  of  fate,  than  thai 
these  people  (the  slaves)  are  to  be  free,  nor  is  it  less  certain  that  the 
two  races,  equally  free,  CANNOT  LIVE  IN  THE  SAME  GOVERNMENT.  Nature, 
habit,  opinion,  have  drawn  indelible  lines  of  distinction  between  them. 
It  is  still  in  our  power  to  direct  the  process  of  emancipation  and  DE 
PORTATION  peaceably,  and  in  such  SLOW  DEGREES,  as  that  the  evil  will 
wear  off  insensibly,  and  their  place  be,  paripassu,  filled  up  by  free  white 
labourers." 

Thus  spoke  Thomas  Jefferson,  than  whom  no  man  was  ever  better 
qualified  to  judge  on  this  great  subject,*  and  yet  an  attempt  is  made  to 
identify  him,  as  well  as  John  Jay,  with  the  visionaryscheme  of  imme 
diate  abolition,  and  they  are  both  quoted,  most  inconsistently,  for  this 
purpose.  If  this  be  not  "  fanaticism,"  when  resorted  to  by  a  good  mam. 
by  what  name  shall  it  be  called  1 

But  I  forbear  to  anticipate  any  farther  the  long  catalogue  of  similar 
testimonies,  which  my  letters  exhibit,  but  would  briefly  inquire  of  any 
reader  who  is  intelligent  and  candid,  whether  it  is  possible  to  account 
for  such  examples,  as  those  to  which  allusion  is  made,  on  any  principle 
consistent  with  the  known  character  of  the  author  for  learning  and 
,'iety,  except  by  the  imputation  of  fanaticism'?  And  when  each  suc 
cessive  example  of  such  conversion  to  the  anti-slavery  ranks,  is  accom 
panied  by  the  evidences  of  a  similar  abandonment  of  all  the  restraints 
of  reason  and  consistency,  to  what  other  cause  is  it  to  be  ascribed  ? 
And  here  I  am  constrained  to  say.  that  if  the  members  of  the  Anti- 
Slavery  Society  were  not  all  fanatics,  they  would  by  this  time  discover 
what  is  palpably  manifest  to  every  body  else,  that  their  doctrines  and 
measures  are  already  inflicting  accumulated  and  irreparable  mischiefs 
upon  the  oppressed  race,  for  whose  welfare  and  happiness  theyprofes- 
exclusive  zeal  and  benevolence,  and  for  whose  good  many  of  them  are 
doubtless  conscientiously  labouring.  If  they  would  suffer  a  colonizn- 
tionist  to  plead  the  cause  of  the  poor  and  needy,  and  if  my  voice  in 
behalf  of  the  suffering  coloured  population,  whether  free  or  enslaved, 
could  be  heard,  amidst  the  groans  of  the  anti-slavery  press  and  the 


'  Mr.  Birncy  Bays,  that  "Mr.  Jefferson  was  tho  advocate  of  all  from  whom  liberty 
was  withheld,  be  they  v/hife,  red,  or  blar,k."  And  yet  we  see  that  lie  was  the  advo'- 
rufo  only  of  gradunl.emancipaiicn&nd  DEPORTATION,  by  sletr  degrees  ! 


PREFACE.  IX 

fulminating  anathemas  of  anti-slavery  lecturers,  I  would  supplicate 
Jheir  mercy,  and  implore  them  to  desist  from  their  misplaced  and  mis 
guided  philanthropy.  In  the  name  of  the  afflicted  free  blacks  of  the 
north  and  the  south,  I  would  point  them  to  the  new  and  oppressive 
legislation  which  they  have  provoked  by  their  ill-timed  endeavours, 
and  the  rash  impetuosity  of  their  blind  and  mistaken  zeal.  And  in 
behalf  of  the  slaves  of  this  land,  I  would  invoke  their  humanity  and 
religion,  while  groaning  under  already  intolerable  laws,  and  beseech 
them  to  withhold  themselves  from  efforts,  which  in  their  results  have 
already  aggravated  the  number  and  severity  of  the  privations  and 
hardships  which  bondage  inflicts. 

But  if  my  vindication  of  the  Colonization  Society  disqualifies  me 
from  successfully  urging  my  appeal,  may  I  not  ask  Mr.  Jay  himself  to 
pause,  now  that  his  book  has  gone  forth  for  the  vain  though  avowed 
purpose  of  the  "  entire  prostration"  the  "  utter  extinction  of  the  Coloni 
zation  Society;" — now  that  he  has  proclaimed  "  unrelenting  hostility," 
and  beaten  up  for  volunteers  to  "  labour  without  rest  and  without 
weariness"  for  this  great  object ;  may  I  be  permitted  to  ask  him  to 
pause  and  inquire,  Cui  bono  ?  Suppose  that  the  Colonization  Society, 
were  "  utterly  extinct,"  and  that  you  had  already  effected  its  "  entire 
prostration" — Let  me  ask  what  good  purpose  or  result  do  your  san 
guine  hopes  allow  you  to  anticipate,  for  the  coloured  race  in  the  Uni 
ted  States  whether  free  or  slaves  1  In  that  case  the  American  Anti- 
Slavery  Society  would  be  your  only  hope-  of  benefiting  them,  and 
where  should  we  look  for  the  first  fruits  of  your  success.  Whose 
voice  would  then  plead  the  cause  of  the  oppressed  in  the  slaveholding 
states?  While  your  anti-slavery  appeals  from  the  forum  and  the  press 
were  "  waking  up  the  north,"  how  many  of  the  "  millions  of  slaves  in 
the  south"  would  be  thus  emancipated,  when  your  orators  are  excluded 
from  every  slaveholding  state  in  the  union,  and  your  publications 
suffered  to  lie  in  the  post-offices,  or  committed  by  thousands  to  the 
flames'?  And  if  you  could  not  hope  to  benefit  the  slaves,  by  your 
labours  in  the  north,  what  influence  would  you  exert  upon  the  free 
coloured  population  of  the  states  south  of  the  Potomac  or  even  in 
Maryland  or  Delaware!  Have  not  the  events  of  the  last  two  years, 
demonstrated  that  these  northern  anti-slavery  efforts,  in  their  effects 
upon  the  free  blacks  of  the  south,. are  "  evil, .only,  evil,  and  that  continu 
ally  ?" 

But  shall  we  look  to  the  non-slaveholdmg  states,  and  estimate  the 
character  of  the  tree  of  "  immediate  abolition"  by.  its  "  fruits  7"  What 
then  have  been  the  results  upon  the  condition  of  the  free  coloured 
people  in  New- York "?  Within  two  brief  years  what  scenes  have  been 
witnessed  in  this  city  and  other  sections  of  the  state  7  Before  the  last 


X  PREFACE. 

year,  an  instance  of  insult  to  persons  of  colour  in  this  city,  under  any 
circumstances,  was  exceedingly  rare.  They  mingled  in  all  our  popu 
lar  assemblages,  and  though  often  genteelly  and  even  fashionably 
attired,  their  presence  attracted  little  attention,  and  provoked  no 
indignity.  The  intelligent  and  respectable  among  them,  and  there 
are  many  such  in  our  city,  were  uniformly  treated  with  kindness,  and 
a  tender  sympathy  for  their  depressed  condition  was  generally  felt 
among  all  classes  of  the  community,  which  if  suffered  to  grow,  could 
not  have  failed  to  be  most  salutary  in  its  results.  Their  friends  among 
the  whites,  were  rejoicing  in  the  gradual  and  successful  efforts  made 
for  their  elevation,  and  the  prospect  of  improving  their  condition 
encouraged  the  efforts  which  humanity  and  religion  were  making  for 
their  improvement.  But  in  an  evil  hour,  the  spirit  of  Garrisoriism 
was  infused  among  these  depressed  people,  and  the  result  was  first 
visible  among  themselves.  From  having  been  quiet  and  unassuming, 
as  the  better  class  of  them  proverbially  were,  they  now  began  to  as 
sume  an  attitude  of  pride  and  independence.  They  were  taught  to 
regard  themselves  as  perfectly  equal  to  the  whites  in  every  aspect, 
and  to  attribute  their  separation,  which  long  custom  had  rendered 
tolerable,  as  the  fruits  of  robbery  and  oppression.  Above  all  they 
were  taught  to  abhor  the  Colonization  Society,  and  to  hate  its  mem 
bers  and  friends  with  a  perfect  hatred.  The  idle  and  visionary  hope 
of  political  and  social  equality  in  every  relation,  has  been  drilled  into 
them,  until  they  have  lost  the  characteristics,  which  until  now  have 
been  their  safeguard  from  indignity  and  outrage.  And  accordingly 
these  poor  unfortunates  have  thence  been  exposed  to  outrages  which 
else  had  never  been  committed.  Apart  from  the  sufferings  inflicted 
upon  the  innocent  and  unoffending,  during  the  abolition  riots  of  the 
last  year,  they  have  since  been  insulted  in  numerous  instances  in  the 
streets,  and  in  public  assemblages,  until  it  has  become  dangerous  for  a 
coloured  person  male,  or  female,  to  be  caught  in  a  crowd.  Their 
clothes  have  been  torn  off,  they  have  been  beaten  and  pelted  with 
stones,  and  other  acts  of  shameful  cruelty  have  been  committed  upon 
them,  such  as  were  hardly  ever  known  in  this  community.  And  why 
this  change  in  the  condition  and  prospects  of  the  free  coloured  people 
of  the  north'?  Unquestionably  it  is  the  result  of  abolitionism,  and 
the  leaders  of  this  party  are  responsible  not  only  for  their  own  acts, 
but  for  the  altered  bearing  and  conduct  of  these  people  themselves,  so 
far  as  this  may  have  provoked  these  outrages.  From  my  soul  I  pity 
the  delusion  under  which  the  coloured  people  of  the  north  have  been 
beguiled  into  circumstances  so  afflicting  to  themselves,  by  the  "  flatter 
ing  unction"  of  these  pseudo  philanthropists. 
The  truth  is  becoming  more  and  more  apparent,  that  in  the  anti- 


PREFACE.  XI 

slavery  crusade  against  "  vincible  prejudice,"  they  have  created  this 
prejudice  where  it  did  not  exist,  and  they  have  fostered  and  strength 
ened  it  where  it  did.  so  that  in  the  less  intelligent  portion  of  the  com 
munity  it  has  acquired  an  intensity  by  which  it  has  been  converted 
into  cruelty  and  persecution.  And  this  has  been  exhibited  in  so 
many  instances,  invariably  and  directly  resulting  from  the  measures 
of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  that  intelligent  men  of  colour  are  begin 
ning  to  feel,  in  the  language  of  one  of  them,  that  "  these  friends  are 
digging  a  pit  for  our  destruction."  Still,  however,  multitudes  of  them 
are  so  infatuated  by  the  anti-slavery  delusion,  that  they  continue  to 
be  inspired  with  the  visionary  hope,  that  they  shall  soon  be  elevated 
to  perfect  and  universal  equality  with  the  white  race. 

I  know  that  the  members  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society  deceive  them 
selves  and  others  by  the  notion  that  if  the  Colonization  Society  were 
annihilated,  these  evils  would  no  longer  exist.  They  seem  to  think 
that  but  for  the  provision  made  by  the  society  to  transport  to  Africa 
such  free  persons  of  colour  or  manumitted  slaves,  as  wish  to  go  there, 
all  the  "  prejudice  of  caste"  would  wither  and  die,  and  no  farther  ob 
stacle  exist  in  the  way  of  "  immediate  and  unconditional  emancipa 
tion."  But  facts  are  altogether  against  this  hypothesis.  Tke  cause 
of  abolition  is  prosperous  only  in  those  sections  of  the  south  where 
colonixatioii  is  popular,  and  no  where  is  this  cause  so  hindered  as  in 
those  slaveholding  states,  where  the  society  has  but  few  friends.  So 
obvious  has  been  the  influence  of  the  Colonization  Society  in  pro 
moting  actual  abolition,  that  the  true  friends  of  the  coloured  race, 
would  find  a  sufficient  motive  for  supporting  it  in  this  single  feature, 
if  it  accomplished  nothing  else  either  here  or  in  Africa. 

I  will  only  add,  that  the  discreet  members  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Soci 
ety,  and  there  are  doubtless  many  such,  might  find  in  the  class  of  men 
with  whom  they  are  associated,  ample  reason  to  pause  and  ponder 
and  retreat.  It  misrht  not  be  easy  to  predict  who  would  not  become 
ihe  votaries  of  abolitionism  in  any  given  place,  where  anti-slavery 
meetings  were  held ;  but  one  might  readily  prophesy  who  would  cer 
tainly  become  such.  Individuals  and  congregations,  who  are  known 
to  be  radicals,  in  church  or  state  ; — prone  to  ultraism  on  every  subject 
with  which  they  are  connected,  are  the  early  converts  to  anti-slavery 
lecturers.  Let  the  observation  be  made  in  any  city,  town,  village,  or 
congregation,  where  abolitionism  has  gained  partizans,  and  it  will  be 
found,  that  however  many  from  among  other  classes  of  the  popula 
tion  may  go  over  to  the  party,  all  those  known  by  their  general  cha 
racter  to  be  enthusiasts,  visionaries,  fanatics,  and  radicals,  in  politics 
cr  morals,  are  sure  to  be  included.  And  if  there  happen  to  be  a  church 
of  any  denomination,  whose  pastor  and  membership  are  proverbially 


Xil  PREFACE. 

given  up  to  eccentricities  in  doctrine  or  to-ultra  measures,  such  church 
will  prove  a  luxuriant  garden  for  the  growth  of  abolitionism.  And 
though  Mr.  Jay  seems  to  deprecate  the  fact  that  "  infidels"  are  occa 
sionally  found  among  the  friends  of  colonization,  yet  among  his  own 
associates,  when  he  becomes  better  acquainted,  he  will  find  many  such. 
One  of  these  infidels  in  this  city,  who  is  an  active  friend  of  temper 
ance  as  well  as  of  immediate  abolition,  publicly  and  unblushingly 
avowed  the  sentiment  very  lately,  that  "  neither  the  Anti-Slavery  Soci 
ety  nor  the  Temperance  Society,  could  ever  succeed,  unless  ike  Bible, 
could  be  got  out  of  the  way .'"  And  when  asked  for  an  explanation, 
he  falsely  alleged  that  the  Bible  justified  both  slavery  and  intemper 
ance,  and  referred  to  what  he  called  Scripture  proofs,  which  he  said, 
while  the  people  believed  and  reverenced,  would  be  an  insuperable 
obstacle  to  both  these  societies. 

As  I  have  attempted  in  the  following  Letters  a  vindication  of  the 
Colonization  Society,  because  this  is  the  chief  object  of  his  attack, 
and  because  I  am  in  heart  and  action  identified  with  that  enter 
prise  ; — so  I  have  been  constrained  to  carry  the  war  into  the  enemy's 
camp,  and  examine  the  principles,  professions,  and  tendency  ojf  the 
American  Anti-slavery  Society,  which  is  the  subject  of  Mr.  Jay's 
affection  and  eulogy. 

Whether  the  :£  free  discussion,"  which  Mr.  Jay  invites,  and  which 
anti-slavery  orators  and  presses  profess  to  desire,  and  which  is  here 
attempted,  shall  be  met  with  a  spirit  correspondent  with  their  unani 
mous  professions,  remains  to  be  seen.  Should  Mr.  Jay  think  him 
self  misapprehended,  or  should  he  be  able  to  maintain  any  one  of  the 
heinous  charges  against  the  Colonization  Society,  which  I  have  deni 
ed  and  repelled  by  unimpeachable  testimony,  the  opportunity  of  free 
discussion  is  accessible  to  him,  and  the  public  will  expect  it.  To  such 
a  reply,  or  to  one  from  any  other  respectable  source,  I  shall  deem  it  a 
duty  and  pleasure  to  extend  all  due  regard,  and  if  I  cannot  sustain 
myself  in  the  estimation  of  the  discerning  public,  I  am  content  to 
suffer  the  forfeiture.  But  while  I  shall  feel  bound  to  give  respectful 
notice  to  any  reply  to  my  arguments,  or  any  denial  of  the  facts  I  re 
cord,  let  it  be  remembered  that  no  reviling,  calumny,  or  abuse  aimed 
at  my  humble  self,  from  any  quarter,  will  meet  any  kind  of  notice. 
"  I  am  doing  a  great  work,  and  cannot  come  down." 

With  these  prefatory  observations,  I  submit  the  following  Letters  to 
the  judgment  of  ihe  reader. 


LETTERS 


TO  THE 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY 


LETTER  I. 

SIR, 

HAVING  read  your  "Inquiry  into  the  character  and  tendency 
of  the  American  Colonization  and  American  Anti-Slavery 
Societies,"  and  being  convinced  that  the  "  character  and  ten 
dency"  of  your  own  book,  demand  an  "inquiry,"  at  this  crisis 
in  public  feeling,  which  you  have  selected  for  its  publication, 
I  have  chosen  the  form  of  letters  to  yourself,  as  that  most  con 
venient  for  my  present  purpose.  The  high  regard  I  entertain 
for  your  general  character  and  private  worth,  so  favourably 
known,  and  deservedly  appreciated  among  our  fellow  citizens, 
will  entitle  you  to  my  respectful  courtesy,  and  our  mutual 
relationship  as  professors  of  a  common  Christianity,  forbid  that 
I  should  impeach  your  motives,  or  impugn  either  your  integrity 
or  benevolence. 

The  subject  of  your  "  Inquiry,"  however,  is  to  every  Ame 
rican  citizen,  of  paramount  importance,  and  to  the  Christian 
of  absorbing  interest.  This  you  seem  fully  to  estimate  when 
you  affirm  in  your  Introduction,  "  If  the  claims  of  the  Ameri 
can  Colonization  Society  are  founded  in  truth,  they  cannot  be. 
resisted  without  guilt!"  page  7.  And  as  you  have  written  a 
volume  in  "  resistance"  of  those  claims,  you  have  been  obliged 
for  the  sake  of  your  own  consistency  and  justification,  to  at- 
l* 


2  LETTERS  TO  THE 

tempt  the  proof  that  they  are  not  "  founded  in  truth."  You 
will  forgive  me  when  I  say,  that  you  have  failed  to  make  ou, 
your  case,  not  for  lack  of  talents  as  a  civili  in,  or  of  skill  as  a 
controversialist,  or  of  learning  as  a  judge,  or  of  sincerity  as  a 
Christian,  but  you  have  in  the  present  case  heen  self-deceived 
by  "  want  of  information,"  and  therefore  you  must  permit  me 
in  turn  to  "  regret  most  sincerely,  that  a  man  possessing  the 
power  of  doing  so  much  good,  should  ever,  through  WANT  or 
INFORMATION,  so  grievously  misapply  it."  p.  162. 

In  this  "  Introduction"  to  your  book,  which  is  the  subject  of 
criticism  in  the  present  letter,  your  first  paragraph  makes  the 
astounding  affirmation,  that  in  the  United  States  there  are 
2,245,144  slaves,*  "compelled  to  live  without  God,  and  to  die 
without  hope,  by  a  people  professing  to  reverence  the  obliga 
tions  of  Christianity."  On  such  a  fact,  if  true,  an  appeal 
might  be  framed  which  would  awaken  heaven  and  earth,  and 
be  "  enough  to  make  an  angel  weep."  But  is  it  true,  that  the 
whole  of  our  slave  population  "  live  without  God  /"  alid  do 
they  all  "die  without  hope!"  and  are  they  "compelled"  to 
do  so  by  the  inhuman  monsters,  who  inhabit  this  nation? 
Every  reader  who  finds  this  hyperbole  at  the  very  threshold  of 

*  This  estimate  of  the  whole  number  of  slaves  in  the  United  States 
on  the  1st  of  January  last,  is  made  from  the  ratio  of  increase  between 
1820  and  1830.  And  as  this  description  of  absolute  and  compulsory 
heathenism,  is  applied  to  them  ALL,  without  exception,  we  shall  look  in 
vain  among  the  publications  of  the  Colonization  Society,  for  any  si 
milar  instance  of  "disparaging  the  free  blacks,"  and  "discouraging 
all  efforts  for  their  improvement,"  as  the  author's  rhetorical  flourish 
here  presents  of  "  these  millions  of  slaves."  If  such  be  truly  the 
character  of  the  slaves,  we  should  scarcely  look  for  its  avowal  by  an 
advocate  of  "  immediate  abolition,"  since  it  presents  "an  apology  for 
slavery"  which  would  justify  the  perpetuity  of  the  system,  unless  they 
could  be  immediately  transformed  by  the  process  of  emancipation,  and 
created  anew  by  "  instant  abolition."  The  preparation  of  such  hea 
thens  for  freedom,  would  indeed  be  a  " triumph  of  gradualism"  al 
though  it  must  be  confessed  that  this  picture  of  the  intellectual  and 
moral  degradation  of  2,245,144  of  our  fellow  beings,  is  enough  not 
only  to  annihilate  the  hopes  of  immediate  abolitionists,  but  to  fill  the 
hearts  of  the  advocates  of  gradual  emancipation  itself  with  despair. 
For  if  the  whole  of  our  slave  population,  at  this  day,  be  suchsas  is 
here  represented,  then  may  philanthropy  and  religion  despair  of  a 
remedy,  and  abandon  their  hopeless  efforts.  But  on  more  mature  re 
flection,  Mr.  Jay  will  acknowledge  that  he  is  mistaken,  and  lament 
his  own  "want  of  information." 


HON.    WILLIAM  JAY. 

your  book,  must  conclude  that  you  commenced  writing  it  in  a 
state  of  mind  and  feeling  not  the  best  calculated  for  a  grave 
"inquiry,"  or  you  would  not  thus  indiscreetly  make  such  a 
statement,  so  utterly  "  at  variance  with  truth  and  Christianity," 
as  you  charitably  charge  against  the  Colonization  Society  on 
your  13th  page.* 

Suffer  me  to  ask  whether  you  had  "forgotten  this  sentence 
when  you  penned  the  132d  page  of  your  book?  How  else  do 
you  say  in  that  place,  "  We  will  not  assert  there  are  no  Chris 
tians  among  the  slaves,  for  we  trust  there  are  some."  And 
again,  "  we  suppose  that  245,000  slaves  possess  a  saving 
knowledge  of  the  religion  of  Christ  /"  Do  you  mean  to  say 
that  these  245,000  Christians,  who  "possess  a  saving  know 
ledge  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  are  compelled  to  live  without 
God,  and  die  without  hope?"  And  can  you  persuade  yourself, 
that  such  a  number  pf  Christians,  who  are  the  "  light  of  the 
world,"  though  they  be  in  bonds,  can  fail  to  "  let  their  light 
shine'  among  the  slaves  around  them,  and  exert  an  influence 
which  shall  prevent  all  "these  millions  from  being  kept  in 
ignorance^  and  compelled  to  live  without  God  and  die  without 
hope  /"  If  this  be  not  undervaluing  the  Christian  character, 
and  depreciating  the  effect  of  Christian  example,  to  an  extent 
beyond  any  of  the  sentiments  of  the  Colonization  Society, 
against  which  you  urge  this  objection,  I  fear  that  you  will  be 
grievously  misinterpreted,  for  such  will  be  the  natural  and  le- 

*  The  reader  will,  I  am  sure,  be  surprised  and  grieved  at  the  ex 
travagance  of  this  sentiment.  If  it  be  true,  that  all  the  slaves  of  the 
United  States,  are  "  compelled  to  live  without  God  and  die  without 
hope"  what  must  be  the  immeasurable  guilt  and  infamy  which  must 
attach  to  those  who  inflict  this  compulsion  !  Is  Mr.  Jay  aware  of  the 
fact  that  thousands  of  slaveholders,  are  his  fellow  Christians,  mem 
bers  of  his  own  and  other  evangelical  churches,  in  the  southern  and 
western  states  1  Does  he  not  know  that  very  many  of  these  are  inde- 
fatigably  employed  in  the  religious  instruction  of  their  slaves,  in  en 
couraging  {tad  supporting  missions  to  the  plantations,  on  many  of 
which  churches  are  buiit  for  the  slaves,  by  these  slaveholders,  where 
the  gospel  and  the  means  of  grace  are  faithfully  supported  at  the  ex 
pense  of  the  planters'?  How  then  does  he  charge  upon  the  owners  of 
these  slaves,  the  heinous  guilt,  the  fiend-like  crime,  of  "compelling 
their  slaves  to  live  without  God  and  die  wkhout  hope?"  If  he  him 
self  believes  this  statement,  he'  must  regard  the  entire  south  as  worse 
than  Sodom  or  Gomorrah,,  and  every  owner  of  slaves  as  a  demon 
incarnate.  I  envy  not,  either  his  charity  or  his  conscience. 


4  LETTERS  TO  THE 

gitimate  conclusion  of  your  readers.  I  confess  it  is  a  subject 
of  surprise  and  affliction  to  me,  that  I  am,  thus  early  in  my 
notice  of  your  book,  required  to  direct  your  attention  to  such 
glaring  inconsistencies  and  mistakes.  I  did  not  expect  it  from 
the  estimate  I  had  formed  of  the  author,  and  must  deeply  re 
gret  that  the  reader  should  find  on  the  5th  page,  this  unfounded 
allegation,  and  then  read  on  the  8th  the  profession  of  a  "  solemn 
recollection"  on  the  part  of  the  author,  that  "no  deviation 
from  truth  can  escape  the  notice  and  displeasure  of  Him  unto 
whom  all  hearts  are  open  and  from  whom  no  secrets  are  hid !" 
It  is  too  painful  to  dwell  on  this  unhappy  evidence  of  the  ten 
dency  of  that  malign  influence  which  it  is  lamentably  appa 
rent,  you  have  unconsciously  received,  by  uncongenial  proxi 
mity  with  the  "  spirit  of  anti-Colonization." 

But  your  "want  of  information"  has  led  you  into  errors 
equally  glaring  in  relation  to  the  American  Colonization  So 
ciety,  and  this  will  appear  to  yourself  and  every  reader  in  the 
very  first  mention  you  make  of  that  institution,  p.  7.  ^ 

"  A  powerful  institution  is  now  in  operation,  which  PRO 
FESSES  to  be  not  merely  a  REMEDY  FOR  SLAVERY,  but  the  ONLY 
remedy  that  can  be  devised." 

Now  there  are  two  statements  in  this  brief  sentence  which  I 
deny.  The  American  Colonization  Society  does  not  "  profess 
to  be  a  remedy  for  slavery,"  nor  does  it  profess  to  be  the  only 
one  that  "  can  be  devised.'1''  To  each  of  these  charges,  in  the 
language  of  the  author  in  his  vindication  of  his  own  associates ; 
"the  members  of  the  Colonization  Society  plead  NOT  GUILTY, 
and  desire  to  be  tried  by  God  and  their  country." 

If  these  are  the  "claims,"  which  you  say  are  not  "founded 
in  truth,"  I  ask  you  and  the  reader  Avhere  are  they  made?  Is 
it  in  the  constitution  of  the  society  that  it  "professes  to  be  not 
merely  a  remedy  for  slavery  but  the  only  one  ?" — let  us  see. 

EXTRACT    FROM    THE    CONSTITUTION    OP    THE    AMERICAN    COLONIZA 
TION    SOCIETY. 

"  Art.  I.  This  Society  shall  be  called  the  American  Society 
for  colonizing  the  free  people  of  colour  of  the  United  States. 

"Art.  II.  The  object  to  which  its  attention  is  to  be  EXCLU 
SIVELY  directed,  is  to  promote  and  execute  a  plan  for  colonizing 
(with  their  consent)  the  free  people  of  colour  residing  in  our 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY. 

country,  in  Africa,  or  such  other  place  as  congress  shall  deem 
most  expedient." 

Now  it  is  obvious  that  this  "powerful  institution"  "pro 
fesses"  nothing  but  what  is  contained  in  these  two  articles,  and 
that  the  term  "exclusively,"  renders  it  absolutely  impossible 
that  it  should  "profess  to  be  a  remedy  for  slavery,  much  less 
the  only  one."  I  would  ask  you  then,  sir,  on  what  authority 
you  make  this  allegation  against  the  Colonization  Society,  and 
whether  you  are  not  here  convicted  of  the  precise  accusation 
you  bring  on  p.  147,  against  the  Hon.  Mr.  Frelinghuysen, 
Chancellor  Walworth,  and  David  B.  Ogden,  Esq.,  by  "not 
scrupling  to  hold  up  your  fellow  citizens  and  fellow  Christians 
to  the  indignation  of  the  public,  on  charges  destitute  of  all 
specification,  and  unsupported  by  a  particle  of  testimony  ?" 

I  need  not  tell  you,  that  it  is  utterly  absurd  to  suppose  that 
your  allegation  can  have  any  foundation  in  truth.  Who  would 
believe  a  society,  "professing-  to  be  a  remedy  for  slavery," 
and  yet  defining  their  exclusive  object  to  be  the  "colonizing 
the  Jree  people  of  colour."  Still  more  absurd  and  ridiculous 
would  be  the  profession  of  being  the  "  only  one  that  can  be 
devised."  What  arrogance  would  this  imply,  in  any  society, 
or  even  "powerful  institution,"  who  should  " profess"  that  no 
remedy  "can  be  devised"  but  theirs,  and  especially  when  their 
constitution  distinctly  demonstrates  that  it  professes  epclu- 
sively  a  different  object.  And  as  I  shall  have  occasion  to 
show,  you  have  yourself  reprobated  the  society,  for  not  devia 
ting  from  its  exclusive  object.  It  is  no  vindication  for  this 
misrepresentation  to  allege,  that  some  one  or  more  of  the 
friends  of  the  society  have  regarded  it  in  either  of  these  lights, 
for  your  charge  is  distinctly  that  the  society  makes  this  pro 
fession^  and  this,  as  a  friend  of  the  society  and  in  defence  of 
the  truth,  I  deny.* 

But  the  next  sentence  in  the  same  paragraph  contains  an 

*  In  the  language  of  another,  we  might  repeat,  "  It  is  not  a  Mis- 
'ionary  Society, — nor  a  society  for  the  suppression  of  the  slave  trade, 
— nor  a  society  for  the  improvement  of  the  blacks, — nor  a  society  for 
the  abolition  of  slavery ; — but  it  is  simply  a  society  for  establishing  a 
colony  on  the  coast  of  Africa;  and  so  far  as  any  of  these  other  objects 
are  attained  by  its  efforts,  they  must  be  attained  either  as  the  means 
or  as  the  consequences  of  establishing  that  colony."  Did  the  society 
2* 


6  LETTERS  TO  THE 

equally  egregious  blunder,  occurring,  like  the  former,  undouoted* 
Jy,  from  "  want  of  information."  This  "  powerful  institution,** 
you  say,  "appeals  to  religion  and  patriotism  for  those"  pecu* 
aiary  aids,  which  it  contends  are  alone  wanting,  to  enable  it 
•  to  transport  our  whole  coloured  population  to  Africa,"  &c. 
JSfow  I  would  respectfully  ask  for  the  evidence  on  which  you 
anake  this  statement.  Is  it  in  the  constitution,  or  in  the  An 
nual  Reports  of  the  managers  ?  Does  not  the  constitutioi- 
give  it  a  palpable  contradiction?  Are  "our  whole  coloured  po 
pulation"  '•'•free  persons  of  colour  ?"  And  if  they  were,  do  they 
all  give  their  "  consent"  to  go  to  Africa  ?  How  then  could 
the  Colonization  Society  "  contend,"  that  money  "  alone"  is 
wanting,  to  "  transport  our  whole  coloured  population,"  when 
over  two  millions  of  them  are  slaves,  which  they  do  not  trans 
port,  and  nine  tenths  of  the  free  withhold  "  their  consent,"  and 
therefore  could  not  be  colonized?  But  even  if  all  were  free, 
and  all  consented  to  go,  I  ask,  where  is  the  evidence  that  the 
society  "  contends"  that  even  then,  money  "  alone  is  wa»tmg 
to  enable  IT  to  transport  OUT  whole  coloured  population?" 

It  is  to  just  such  misrepresentations,  and  misapprehensions 
arising  from  "want  of  information,"  or  erroneous  information, 
that  the  lamented  Wilberforce*  withdrew  his  confidence  from 
the  cause ;  and  to  the  same  source  is  it  to  be  ascribed,  if,  as 
you  say,  the  American  Colonization  Society  "  is  regarded  with 
abhorrence  by  almost  the  whole  religious  community  of  Great 
Britain."  When  such  a  man  as  Wm.  Lloyd  Garrison  was  sent 
to  England,  mainly  on  the  errand  of  denouncing  the  motives, 
character,  and  tendency  of  the  society,  and  when  even  a  Brit 
ish  philanthropist,  in  rebuking  him  for  vilifying  his  country, 
was  constrained  to  say,  "  Mr.  Garrison  distorts  meanings, — 
fastens  the  speeches  of  individuals  on  the  society, — quotes 
partially, — conceals  explanations, — exaggerates, — clamours, 

ever  "profess  to  be  a  remedy  for  slavery  and  the  only  onel"  I  sub 
mit  to  Mr.  Jay  whether  he  has  not  here  overlooked  the  ninth  com 
mandment  of  the  decalogue.  Let  reason  and  conscience  answer. 

*  Dr.  Hodgkin,  of  London,  in  his  able  pamphlet,  says,  that  ''Wil 
berforce  continued  to  avow  his  approbation  of  the  American  Coloni 
zation  Society,  notwithstanding  the  attacks  and  insinuations  of  its 
adversaries,  until  near  the  period  of  hia  lamented  death,  when  the 
exparte  statements  of  those  who  knew  the  importance  of  his  authority 
obtained  a  triumph,  the  achievement  of  which  confers  no  honour," 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  7 

—and  cants,"  what  could  be  expected  other  than  that  just  so  far 
as  he  was  believed  in  Great  Britain,  the  society  and  the  nation 
would  be  viewed  with  "  abhorrence  ?"  His  pamphlet  contained 
ten  specific  accusations  against  the  society,  most  heinous  and 
anti-Christian  in  their  nature ;  and  although  the  society  and  its 
friends  plead  not  guilty  to  each  of  them,  and  have  continued  to 
the  present,  ';  solemnly"  to  pronounce  their  author  to  be  a  ca 
lumniator,  yet  I  regret  to  perceive,  that  the  most  of  these  offen 
ces  are  alleged  against  the  society  in  your  book,  and  in  some 
instances  fortified  by  quotations  even  from  Garrison  himself! 
i>ut  suffer  me  to  adopt  your  own  language,  and  ask,  "  What 
proof  is  offered?  Nothing,  absolutely  nothing  is  offered,  but 
naKed  assertion.  Is  this  equitable  ?  Is  it  doing  to  others  as 
you  wouid  wish  others  to  do  to  you  ?" 

I  snail,  in  my  next  letter,  notice  the  first  chapter  in  your 
DooL  and  I  regret  to  say,  that  it  abounds  in  exceptionable  and 
erroneous  matter  no  less  than  your  brief  introduction,  and  be 
lieve  me,  my  animadversions  upon  your  "  inquiry,"  are  offered 
"  more  in  sorrow  than  in  anger,"  and  you  must  not  account  me 
an  enemy  because  I  tell  you  the  truth. 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  II. 

SIR, 

YOUR  first  chapter,  on  the  "Origin,  Constitution  and  Charac- 
ler  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,"  will  be  the  subject 
of  the  present  letter.  And  I  cannot  withhold  the  expression  of 
my  regret,  that  your  deplorable  "  want  of  information"  has  lea 
you  into  an  error,  for  which,  I  am  sure,  your  own  candid  recon 
sideration  of  your  book,  will  inspire  you  with  repentance,  how 
ever  unavailing  it  may  be,  in  respect  to  the  influence  it  has  al 
ready  exerted,  and  will  continue  to  exert,  wherever  it  is  read. 
I  allude  now  to  the  obvious  attempt  you  make  to  connect  a 
"  resolution  of  the  Legislature  of  Virginia,"  with  the  "  origin" 
of  the  American  Colonization  Society.  Your  object  is  so  obvi 
ously  to  identify  the  organization  of  the  society  with  slavery 
and  slaveholders,  that  you  connect  these  two  events,  which  you 
ought  to  know,  have  no  more  kindred  relation,  than  your  own 
book  has  with  either  of  them.  The  coincidence  in  the  date  of 
the  Virginia  resolution,  23d  December,  1816,*  and  that  of  the 
organization  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,  is  obvious 
ly  pointed  at,  when  you  say,  "  within  a  few  days  of  the  date 
of  this  resolution,  a  meeting  was  held  at  Washington,  to  take 
this  very  subject  into  consideration.  It  was  composed  almost 

*  It  is  singularly  unfortunate  for  Mr.  Jay's  object,  that  the  mseling 
jield  in  Washington,  "  within  a  few  days"  of  this  date,  "  to  take  this 
very  subject  into  consideration,"  had  the  priority  in  point  of  time,  to 
the  Virginia  resolution,  for  it  was  held  on  the  21st  of  December,  1816, 
two  days  before  that  resolution,  and  not,  as  erroneously  insinuated, 
after  it.  If  then  he  had  been  willing  to  express  the  truth  chronologi 
cally,  he  would  have  first  related  the  meeting  of  the  "  slaveholders" 
in  Washington,  and  then  the  subsequent  resolution  of  the  Virginia 
Legislature,  as  occurring  "within  a  few  days  of  the  date"of  the  former. 
But  this  would  have  reversed  the  impression  designed  to  be  made 
upon  the  reader's  mind,  yet  the  truth  required  it. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  9 

entirely  of  southern  gentlemen ;"  and  after  naming  Judge 
Washington,  Mr.  Clay,  and  Mr.  Randolph,  you  say,  the  meet 
ing  "  resulted  in  the  organization  of  the  American  Coloniza 
tion  Society  !"  Such  disingenuousness  and  uncandid  distortion 
of  facts,  especially  with  the  design  of  attributing  the  origin  of 
the  society  to  the  Virginia  resolution  referred  to,  was  hardly 
to  be  expected  from  such  a  man  as  Mr.  Jay. 

But  who  would  imagine,  that  you  could  have  professed  to  give 
the  c  origin  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,"  and  yet, 
never  mention  the  name  of  its  illustrious  and  excellent  founder? 
This  were  to  betray  as  great  "want  of  information"  as  a  man 
would  exhibit,  if  he  were  to  pretend  to  write  the  history  of  his 
country,  and  never  once  name  the  "  father  of  his  country."  And 
yet,  such  is  the  attitude  in  which  you  have  been  placed  by  the 
"  bad  advisers"  into  whose  hands  you  have  unhappily  fallen. 
Even  Garrison  !  pronounces  the  name  of  ROBERT  FINLAY  with  re 
spect  and  veneration,  and  declares  him  and  many  of  his  followers 
to  be  "  men  of  piety,  benevolence,  and  moral  worth.'3  Indeed,  in 
the  crusade  he  has  been  prosecuting  against  the  society,  when 
he  speaks  of  "  those  who  planned  the  American  Colonization 
Society,"  he  has  a  "  lucid  interval  to  his  madness,"  and  is 
constrained  by  reason  or  conscience,  to  say,  that  "  some  of 
them,  undoubtedly,  were  actuated  by  a  benevolent  desire  to  pro 
mote  the  welfare  of  our  coloured  population,  and  could  never 
have  intended  to  countenance  oppression  I"  But  alas,  we 
look  to  your  book  in  vain  for  any  other  name  in  connexion 
with  the  "  origin"  of  this  scheme  of  philanthropy  but  those  ol 
"  slaveholders,"  or  those  whom  you  stigmatize  with  this  epithet. 
Let  me  ask,  is  this  fair?  Is  it  candid?  Is  this  an  exemplifica 
tion  of  the  "  golden  rule  ?"  Because  that  holy  man,  ROBERT 
FINLAY,  the  founder  of  the  society,  and  his  devoted  companions, 
in  this  "  work  of  faith,"  the  excellent  Caldwell,  and  the  pious 
Mills, — because  these  were  not  "  slaveholders,"  you  carefully 
omit  to  mention  their  names,  in  your  professed  history  of  the 
"  origin"  of  the  society ;  while  other  names  are  repeated  for 
this  single  reason,  that  they  were  slaveholders.  I  charitably 
hope,  that  your  "  want  of  information"  may  prove  a  sufficient 
apology  to  your  conscience  and  your  God. 
You  next  quote  the  first  two  articles  of  the  constitution, 


10  LETTERS  TO  THE 

against  which  you  protest,  because  you  allege  the  want  of  a 
u.preambfo,  setting  forth  the  motives  which  led  to  its  adoption, 
and  the  sentiments  entertained  by  its  authors."  Has  the  Ame 
rican  Bible  Society  any  such  preamble  to  its  constitution?  or 
has  that  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society,  which  you  so 
zealously  advocate  ?  The  "  motives  and  sentiments"  of  the 
authors,  are  explicitly  declared  in  the  constitution  itself,  in  ail 
these  societies,  and  "  the  want  of  a  preamble"  is  an  objection 
whicn  has  as  much  force  against  the  one  as  the  other  of 
them.  Indeed,  the  method  of  prefixing  a  "  preamble"  to  con 
stitutions,  is  now,  for  the  most  part,  obsolete,  and  is  very  rarely 
adopted  any  where.  This  objection,  then,  is  entirely  unfound 
ed,  though  you  most  uncharitably  attribute  the  "  omission  of 
all  avowal  of  motives  to  design" 

The  effect  which  you  allege,  as  produced  by  this  designed 
omission,  is  that  of  "  securing  the  co-operation  of  three  class 
es,"  whom  you  designate  as  benevolent  men,  interested  slave 
holders,  and  cruel  persecutors,  and  you  affirm  that,  "  there*is  no 
one  'principle  of  duty  or  policy"  recognised  by  the  constitu 
tion.  How  you  could  make  this  assertion  in  the  face  of  the 
two  articles  you  quote,  is  indeed  "  passing  strange."  Is  not 
u  promoting  and  executing  a  plan  for  colonizing  the  free  people 
of  colour"  one  "  principle  of  duty  ?"  and  is  not  another  principle 
of  duty  found  in  the  word  "  exclusively"  in  relation  to  the  sin 
gle  object,  and  still  another,  in  the  words  "with  their  consent," 
which  is  tantamount  to  an  assurance,  that  "  forcible  expatria 
tion"  can  never  receive  the  countenance  of  the  society.  And 
is  there  "  no  one  principle  of  policy"  in  the  reference  to  "  Afri 
ca,  or  such  other  place  as  congress  shall  deem  most  expedi 
ent"  and  "  in  co-operation  with  the  general  government  and 
such  of  the  states  as  may  adopt  regulations  on  the  subject?" 
These  are  the  "motives  and  sentiments"  of  the  society,  as 
avowed  in  their  constitution,  and  in  precisely  the  location  in 
which  a  similar  avowal  of  other  "  motives  and  sentiments^  is 
found  in  the  constitution  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society, 
viz.  in  the  second  article,  and  not  in  the  "  preamble,"  for  there 
is  none  in  either. 

As  to  the  "  heterogeneous  multitude  who  have  entered  the 
Colonization  Society,  because  its  doors  are  thrown  open  to  all," 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  1 

the  only  difference  consists  in  the  fact,  that  in  the  Anti-Slavery 
Society,  slaveholders  are  excluded.  This  exclusion  is,  how 
ever,  more  nominal  than  real ;  for,  though  slaveholders  are  pro 
hibited  from  becoming  members,  yet  slave-traders  are  not3  i* 
they  "  consent  to  the  principles  of  the  constitution,  and  contri 
bute  to  the  funds."  I  say  nothing  of  the  incongruity  of  form 
ing  a  society  professedly  against  slavery,  and  yet  excluding 
from  its  portals  the  only  persons  who  can  practise  abolition 
For  even  if  a  slaveholder  consents  to  the  principles  of  the  con 
stitution,  and  pays  to  the  funds,  yet  he  cannot  be  a  member  o* 
Ihe  society,  however  anxious  to  get  rid  of  his  slaves,  until  the 
Colonization  Society  first  transport  his  slaves  to  Liberia,  ana 
'&LUS  render  him  eligible  for  membership  in  the  Anti-Slavery 
Society.  If  a  moiety  of  the  sums  expended  upon  Anti-Slavery 
agents,  and  in  the  support  of  the  Anti-Slavery  press,  were  paiu 
over  to  tne  treasury  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,  they 
would  render  very  many  benevolent  and  pious  slaveholders  eli 
gible  to  membership,  who  for  want  of  it,  will  probably  nevei 
be  able  to  obtain  admission,  nor  cease  to  be  slaveholders. 

But  your  next  complaint  against  the  constitution,  is,  that  so 
great  a  variety  of  characters,  influenced  by  an  equal  variety  Ox 
motives,  good  and  bad,  leads  to  "  a  lamentable  compromise  of 
principle."  To  show  that  this  is  what  logicians  call  a  non  sequi- 
tur,  it  will  only  be  necessary  to  refer  to  the  British  and  Foreign 
Bible  Society,  an  institution  whose  principles  and  practice 
challenge  the  admiration  of  the  world.  Its  "single  object"  is 
the  "  circulation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  without  note  or  com 
ment.'-'  It  makes  no  requisition  of  "  motives  or  sentiments"  in 
"  a  preamble,"  nor  does  it  require  any  test  of  membership,  for 
every  slaveholder  on  the  earth  may  be  a  member.  It  contains 
as  great  an  "  amalgamation  of  characters  and  motives,"  and 
"  the  doors  of  the  society  being  thrown  open  to  all^  a  hetero 
geneous  multitude  has  entered,  and  within  its  portals,  men  are 
brought  into  contact,  who,  in  the  ordinary  walks  of  life,  are  se 
parated  by  a  common  repulsion."  In  short,  all  that  you  say  in 
this  strain,  against  the  American  Colonization  Society,  lies 
with  equal  force  against  that  great  and  good  institution,  the 
British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society.  But  would  you  thence  al 
lege,  a  *'  lamentable  compromise  of  principle."  Because  Cal- 


18  LETTERS   TO   THE 

vinists  and  Armmians,  Paedo  Baptists,  and  Anti-Psedo  Baptists, 
High  Church  and  Low  Church,  Trinitarians  and  Unitarians, 
Orthodox  and  Heterodox,  a  "  heterogeneous  multitude,"  have 
entered  its  portals,  and  agreed  to  unite  in  the  "  single  object" 
of  the  society,  however  they  may  be  "  separated  by  a  com 
mon  repulsion"  on  all  other  subjects, — would  you  be  found  in 
league  with  Irving  and  others,  in  denouncing  that  noble  enter 
prise  of  human  benevolence,  the  extent  of  whose  usefulness  is 
by  this  very  "  heterogeneousness,"  tenfold  greater  than  it  could 
otherwise  be  ?  Your  avowed  attachment  to  the  American  Bi 
ble  Society,  founded  on  similar  principles,  forbids  the  suppo 
sition,  and  yet  you  are  yourself  associated  in  that  society  witr 
slaveholders  by  the  thousand. 

But  I  have  said,  that  you  reprobate  the  society  because  of  its 
exclusive  character,  as  appears  in  this  chapter,  in  which  you 
complain,  that  "  the  constitution  contains  no  allusion  to 
slavery."  How  then  did  you  charge  it  with  "  professing  to  be 
a  remedy  for  slavery."  If  this  charge  were  true,  you  might 
justly  complain,  that  "  its  constitution  contains  no  allusion  to 
slavery,"  for  this  would  indeed  involve  an  inconsistency.  As 
it  is,  however,  this  fact  is  in  itself  a  refutation  of  all  you  have 
said  on  this  subject. 

Your  assertion,  that  the  silence  of  the  constitution  with  re 
spect  to  manumission,  "is  not  permitted  to  interpose  the  slight 
est  obstacle  to  a  unanimous,  vigorous,  and  persevering  "oppo 
sition  to  present  manumission,"  is  entirely  destitute  of  proof, 
and  that  the  American  Colonization  Society  either  "  deprecates 
the  emancipation  of  slaves,  or  censures  all  who  propose  it,"  is 
palpably  in  contravention  of  multiplied  facts,  of  some  of  which, 
your  own  book  furnishes  the  evidence,  as  I  shall  hereafter  have 
occasion  to  demonstrate.  The  tirade  here  indulged  in,  to  show 
that  it  is  constitutional  to  denounce  the  foreign  traffic,  and  de 
clare  it  piratical,  and  at  the  same  time  unconstitutional,  to  con 
demn  the  domestic  slave  trade,  or  labour  for  its  suppression ; — 
anil  the  illiberal  insinuation,  that  these  inconsistencies  are  "  ex- 
ppjients  to  conciliate  the  slaveholders,"  will  also  be  noticed^m 
a  subsequent  letter. 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  13 


LETTER  III. 

SIR, 

THE  following  paragraph  in  your  book,  I  regard  as  one  of 
the  most  extraordinary  examples  of  "  at  least  doubtful  mo 
rality,"  to  use  your  own  language,  that  I  have  ever  seen  from 
the  pen  of  a  good  man,  and  it  is  one  which  calls  for  a  specific 
examination. 

"To  hold  up  the  free  blacks  to  the  detestation  of  the  com 
munity  is  constitutional ! — to  recommend  them  to  the  sym 
pathy  of  Christians,  to  propose  schools  for  their  instruction, 
plans  for  encouraging  their  industry,  and  efforts  for  their 
moral  and  religious  improvement,  would  be  such  a  flagrant 
departure  from  the  'exclusive'  object  of  the  society,  that  NO 
MEMBER  has  hitherto  been  rash  enough  to  make  the  attempt ! 
At  the  same  time,  it  is  quite  constitutional  to  vindicate  the 
cruel  laws  which  are  crushing  these  people  to  the  dust,  and  to 
show  that  the  oppression  they  suffer  is  an  '  ordination  of 
providence.'  " 

As  a  number  of  these  statements  will  come  up  in  another 
form  as  we  proceed,  I  will  at  present  only  offer  my  remon 
strance  against  the  strange  and  unaccountable  asseveration, 
that  "  no  member  of  the  Colonization  Society  has  hitherto 
been  rash  enough  to  make  the  attempt  to  propose  schools  for 
the  instruction,  plans  for  the  encouragement  of  the  industry, 
or  efforts  for  the  moral  and  religious  improvement  of  the  free 
blacks  /"  And  now,  sir,  allow  me  to  ask  you  whether  you  do 
not  know,  that  until  two  or  three  years  ago,  the  efforts  made, 
plans  proposed,  and  schools  sustained,  for  the  benefit  of  the 
free  blacks  in  every  part  of  the  United  States,  were  for  the 
most  part,  the  result  of  the  personal  exertions  and  liberality  of 
members  of  the  Colonization  Society  ?  Who  are  the  men  who 
have  borne  the  burden  and  heat  of  the  day,  in  the  various 
Manumission  Societies  in  Pennsylvania,  New-York,  New- 
3 


14  LETTERS  TO  THE 

Jersey,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  Rhode  Island,  even  when 
the  most  of  these  were  slave  states  ?  Are  they  not  the 
men,  in  numerous  instances,  at  least,  who  are  members  and 
friends  of  the  Colonization  Society  ?  Are  there  not  eight  free 
manumission  schools  in  the  city  of  New-York  alone,  which 
have  chiefly  been  sustained  by  colonizationists  ?  Who  has 
built,  purchased,  and  sustained  churches  for  the  "  moral  and  re 
ligious  improvement  of  the  free  blacks"  in  every  part  of  this 
country  ?  Let  this  investigation  be  made,  and  you  will  be 
ashamed  of  the  injustice  you  have  unwittingly  done  to  the 
members  of  the  Colonization  Society. 

I  might  here  refer  you  to  the  numerous  day  and  Sunday 
schools  for  the  free  blacks,  which  colonizationists  have  organised 
and  conducted,  many  of  which  are  now  in  successful  operation, 
and  some  of  which  have  been  broken  up  by  the  benevolent  efforts 
of  the  anti-slavery  people,  in  creating  prejudice  against  teachers, 
after  years  of  devotion  to  the  best  interests  of  these  people,  by 
denouncing  them  to  their  scholars,  as  members  of  the  Colohi- 
zation  Society,  and,  therefore,  "  wolves  in  'sheep's  clothing."* 

But  suffer  me  lo  refer  you  to  the  recent  purchase  of  the  Presby- 


*  A  striking  illustration  exists  in  New-York,  in  the  history  of  a 
Sabbath  school  for  coloured  people,  adults  and  children,  under  the 
patronage  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Milnor,  of  this  city,  and  superintended  for 
a  number  of  years  by  Mr.  Taylor.  In  this  school,  numbering  be 
tween  three  and  four  hundred  scholars,  many  have  been  taught  to 
read,  some  in  advanced  life,  and  the  moral  and  religious  improve 
ment  of  the  scholars  was  most  gratifying  to  the  friends  of  humanity, 
and  until  the  introduction  of  the  Anti-Slavery  mania,  its  prosperity 
and  success  continued  without  interruption.  But  during  the  last  year, 
it  was  ascertained  that  the  superintendant  would  not  join  the  Anti- 
Slavery  Society,  and  it  was  therefore  concluded,  de  facto,  by  some  of 
its  members,  that  he  was  a  colonizationist,  although  he  has  never  be 
come  a  member  of  any  Colonization  Society.  Nevertheless,  as  he 
did  not  become  an  anti-c-olonizationist,  and  declined  having  that 
subject  introduced  into  his  Sabbath  school,  the  most  diligent  and 
persevering  efforts  were  used  by  the  abolitionists  to  alienate  the 
scholars,  and  estrange  their  confidence  from  the  school  and  its  inde 
fatigable  teachers,  whose  practical  benevolence  had  been  demonstrated 
by  years  of  faithful  devotion  to  this  work.  The  result  of  such  bene 
volent  efforts  has  been  seen,  in  the  diminution  of  the  number  of  scho^ 
!ars  from  400  to  40  or  50,  and  the  persecution  of  those  who  remain 
The  bitter  and  uncompromising  opposition  to  this  school,  has  probably 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  the  Rev.  Dr.  Milnor,  the  pastor  of  the  church 
by  whom  it  is  sustained,  is  an  officer  of  the  city  Colonization  Society. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  15 

terian  church  in  Frankfort-street,  New-York,  occupied  by  a 
congregation  of  free  blacks,  under  the  pastoral  care  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Wright.  When  the  Committee  of  the  "  New-York  Pres 
bytery,"  went  through  the  city,  soliciting  donations  for  this  laud 
able  object,  begging  from  door  to  door,  until  they  obtained  be 
tween  nine  and  twelve  thousand  dollars  ;  who  were  the  men 
whose  subscriptions  of  from  one  to  five  hundred  dollars,  gave 
evidence  of  their  interest  in  the  moral  and  religious  improve 
ment  of  these  people  ?  I  answer,  they  were,  with  scarcely  an  in 
dividual  exception,  members  and  friends  of  the  Colonization 
Society.  Your  friend  and  fellow  labourer,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Cox, 
then  a  colonizationist,  was  one  of  the  committee  at  first,  though 
his  anti-slavery  occupations,  since  his  conversion  to  that  creed, 
have  rendered  it  inconvenient  to  continue  to  act  with  the  com 
mittee.  He  can  tell  you,  however,  if  he  has  not  forgotten  it, 
who  were  the  men,  who  refused  to  contribute  to  this  scheme  of 
benevolence,  and  excused  themselves  on  the  anti-slavery  pre 
text,  that  they  disapproved  of  providing  separate  places  of  wor 
ship  for  the  "  free  blacks,"  lest  it  should  foster  prejudice,  and 
insisted  that  they  ought  to  be  provided  for  in  our  own  churches, 
"  without  distinction  of  colour." 

The  subscription  book  may  yet  be  seen,  and  you  would  be 
constrained  after  examining  it,  for  yourself,  to  retract  your 
cruelly  unjust  accusation,  that  "  no  member  of  the  Coloniza 
tion  Society"  has  attempted  "  efforts  for  the  moral  and  reli 
gious  improvement  of  the  free  blacks,"  if  conscience  and  duty 
did  not  compel  you  to  render  restitution  to  those,  whose  names 
and  memory  you  have  thus  rudely  assailed.  Let  me  not  be 
understood  to  impugn  your  motives,  or  impeach  your  sincerity, 
but  only  to  allege  your  lamentable  "  want  of  information"  as 
the  obvious  cause  of  your  mistakes. 

From  such  erroneous  opinions  as  your  recent  associations 
have  led  you  to  form,  and  the  perverted  views  you  have  thence 
taken  of  this  whole  subject,  it  is  no  marvel  that  your  zeal 
should  be  enkindled  against  a  society  whose  principles  and 
practice  you  have  so  grievously  misunderstood.  Hence  you 
deliberately  charge  upon  "  good  men  and  good  Christians"  the 
"  adoption  of  expediency,  as  the  standard  of  right  and  wrong, 


16  LETTERS  TO  THE 

in  the  place  of  the  revealed  will  of  God . '— "  opinions  and 
practices  inconsistent  with  justice  and  humanity  /"  and  under 
the  demoralizing  influence  "  of  colonization,"  you  allege 
against  these  "good  men  and  good  Christians"  that  they 
"  advance  in  its  behalf  opinions  at  variance  with  truth  and 
Christianity !"  Truly  you  are  constrained  to  admit,  that  "  these 
are  grave  assertions,  and  very  extraordinary  ones  I"  and  our 
readers  will  see  in  the  sequel  what  proof  you  present  in  the 
form  of  "  authentic  facts."  It  must  be  obvious,  however,  to 
yourself,  that  in  this  your  "  general  statement  of  the  case 
against  the  society,"  you  have  included  in  your  indictment  so 
many  counts  that  impeach  the  integrity  of  its  members,  that 
if  a  moiety  of  them  be  substantiated,  so  far  from  being  "  good 
men  and  good  Christians,"  they  are,  en  masse,  worthy  of  the 
reprobation  of  every  friend  of  humanity,  "  fellows  not  fit  to 
live." 

And  now,  sir,  these  "grave  assertions  and  very  extraordi 
nary  ones,"  as  you  admit  them  to  be,  involve  the  personal  ^nd 
Christian  character  of  men,  distinguished  at  home  and  abroad 
for  their  station,  reputation,  and  usefulness.  The  gentlemen 
whose  names  you  unceremoniously  introduce  into  your  book, 
are  not  only  regarded  as  Christian  gentlemen,  but  many  of 
them  as  Christian  divines,  whose  estimable  character  and  pri 
vate  worth,  has  made  them  known  and  respected  in  every  part 
of  our  own  country,  and  equally  so  in  every  Christian  nation 
on  the  earth.  And  yet,  against  these  men,  your  book  alleges 
not  merely  a  "  lamentable  compromise  of  principle,"  but  you 
ascribe  to  them  the  attributes  of  "  stupidity,"  "  ignorance," 
"prejudice,"  "inconsistency,"  "persecution,"  " cruelty,"  "  in 
humanity,"  "duplicity,"  and  opinions  and  practice  "at  vari 
ance  with  truth  and  Christianity."  You  represent  the  Hon. 
Theodore  Frelinghuysen,  Chancellor  Walworth,  David  B. 
Ogden,  Esq.,  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Hawks,  the  venerable  Bishop 
White,  Rev.  Dr.  Beecher,  and  all  others  among  the  respectable 
divines,  statesmen,  patriots,  and  Christians,  who  belong  to  the 
Colonization  Society,  as  men  utterly  unworthy  of  the  affection 
or  confidence  of  the  "friends  of  humanity  and  religion,"  and 
you  call  upon  such  for  "  unrelenting  hostility"  against  them 
and  the  cause  with  which  they  are  identified. 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  17 

Wherever  your  book  shall  go,  its  readers  will  be  prepared,  if 
they  believe  your  accusations,  to  look  upon  these  excellent 
men,  with  loathing  and  "  abhorrence,"  and  these  American 
divines  and  Christians,  when  they  visit  England  or  France,  as 
the  agents  of  the  churches,  and  the  representatives  of  our  bene 
volent  institutions,  will  be  viewed,  so  far  as  your  testimony  can 
produce  this  effect,  as  the  abettors  of  a  system  of  "  abomina 
ble  persecution."  And  the  responsibility  for  all  this  "obloquy 
and  reproach"  being  poured  upon  "good  men  and  good  Chris 
tians,"  as  you  inconsistently  call  them,  you  have  voluntarily 
assumed.  Where  they  are  known,  they  are  shielded  from  all 
your  shafts,  by  their  established  integrity  ;  and  I  need  not  tell 
you,  that  pure  and  exalted  as  your  own  character  is  admitted  to 
be  at  home,  these  gentlemen,  whom  you  assail,  are  in  every 
respect  your  equals  in  the  estimation  of  the  Christian  public, 
for  all  that  is  "  lovely  and  of  good  report,"  and  that  the  en 
dorsement  of  your  name  to  this  attack  upon  their  reputations, 
will  be  utterly  insufficient  to  stain  their  characters,  or  abstract 
from  them  any  measure  of  the  public  confidence.  But  at  a  dis 
tance  from  home,  in  our  own  and  other  countries,  the  accusa 
tions  of  your  book  cannot  but  inflict  upon  these  your  "  Chris 
tian  brethren"  unmerited  injuries,  which  you  can  never  repair, 
and  wounds,  which  you  can  never  heal.  If  this  consideration 
can  afford  you  consolation,  either  living  or  dying,  you  are  wel 
come  to  its  exclusive  enjoyment. 

I  propose  to  continue  my  correspondence  until  I  shall 
examine  the  whole  of  the  "  special  pleading,"  which  you  have 
thought  necessary  in  the  case.  To  each  and  every  one  of 
your  charges,  the  society  and  its  friends  plead  "  not  guilty" 
and  as  we  are  now  before  the  American  people,  and  you  and  I 
are  members  of  that  bar,  and  engaged  as  opposite  counsel, 
though  volunteers  in  the  case,  I  shall  submit  to  the  court  and 
jury  a  brief  analysis  of  the  evidence  you  present,  and  claim  the 
verdict  which  reason  and  conscience  shall  approve.  In  one 
respect,  I  may,  without  arrogance,  lay  claim  to  stand  on  equal 
footing  with  yourself.  I  mean,  in  the  honest  conviction  that 
my  client,  the  American  Colonization  Society,  is  innocent  of 
the  crimes  and  high  misdemeanours,  for  which  you  have  drawn 
the  indictment.  And  while  I  award  to  you  an  equal  conscien- 
2* 


18  LETTERS  TO  THE 

tiousness  in  conducting  the  prosecution,  and  a  full  persuasion 
that  my  client  is  guilty  and  ought  to  be  condemned,  I  shall 
submit  the  case  to  God  and  my  country,  and  personating  my 
client,  I  would  exclaim  with  the  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles, 
"  If  I  be  an  offender,  or  have  committed  any  thing  worthy  of 
death,  I  refuse  not  to  die." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  19 


LETTER  IV. 

SIR, 

YOUR  second  chapter  will  constitute  the  subject  of  the  pre 
sent  letter,  and  although  it  is  extended  through  38  pages  of 
your  book,  yet  there  is  so  much  of  irrelevant  and  technical  mat 
ter  contained  in  it,  that  I  shall  purposely  decline  any  very 
minute  or  detailed  controversy,  except  in  reference  to  a  few 
points  directly  bearing  on  the  subject. 

After  denying  that  there  is  any  thing  necessarily  benevolent 
in  the  exclusive  object  of  colonizing  the  free  people  of  colour 
with  their  own  consent,  you  charge  upon  the  society,  "  the 
policy  of  aggravating  prejudice  against  the  free  blacks,"  and 
with  using  "  unchristian  language  in  regard  to  this  unhappy 
and  oppressed  portion  of  their  fellow  men."  To  sustain  this 
heinous  allegation,  a  number  of  extracts  are  given  from 
speeches  delivered  by  friends  of  the  society,  and  other  printed 
documents.  As  in  my  subsequent  letters,  I  may  have  occasion 
to  apply  the  lex  talionis,  to  the  society  you  represent,  I  shall 
waive  the  legitimate  objection  often  made  by  the  society, 
against  being  held  responsible  for  the  sentiments  held  or  ex 
pressed  by  its  real  or  supposed  friends.  These  may  be  injudi 
cious  and  often  erroneous,  and  according  to  no  honest  rules  of 
testimony  can  any  body  of  men  be  held  accountable  for  every 
expression  used  by  its  individual  members,  and  especially 
when  detached  and  dismembered  sentences  are  selected,  often 
without  accompanying  qualifications,  which  essentially  modify 
and  even  change  the  speaker's  meaning.  But  admitting  that 
the  extracts  you  make  do  prove,  as  you  design,  that  their  authors 
"  aggravate  the  prejudice  against  the  free  blacks,"  even  by  the 
use  of  "  unchristian  language,"  it  is  only  necessary  for  me  to 
prove  by  the  same  kind  of  evidence,  that  other  and  opposite 
sentiments  are  held  and  expressed  in  a  different  spirit,  and  it 
will  then  be  in  proof,  that  the  society  is  as  much  represented  in 


20  LETTERS   TO   THE 

the  one  case  as  the  other;  that  is,  responsible  for  neither. 
Whenever  a  speaker  or  writer  introduces  any  sentiment  other 
than  in  favour  of  the  exclusive  object  of  "  colonizing  the  free  peo 
ple  of  colour  with  their  own  consent,"  he  alone  is  responsible,  and 
not  the  society  whose  cause  he  advocates.  A  Unitarian  will  ad 
vocate  the  distribution  of  the  Bible,  with  the  avowed  motive  to 
propagate  his  doctrines  ;  so  also  will  a  Universalist,  a  Baptist,  a 
Calvinist,  an  Arminian,  and  each  will  urge  upon  his  congrega 
tion  the  duty  of  promoting  the  circulation  of  the  Scriptures,  for  the 
purpose  of  advancing  the  doctrines  of  his  particular  sect.  But 
did  you  ever  dream  that  the  Bible  Society  was  accountable  for 
the  varied  and  even  opposite  arguments  of  its  professed  friends. 
But  an  attempt  to  prove  the  American  Bible  Society  to  be  a 
Unitarian  Society,  because  those  who  deny  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  profess  to  expect  their  doctrines  to  be  propagated  by  the, 
circulation  of  "the  Scriptures  without  note  or  comment," 
would  not  be  more  preposterous,  than  to  argue  that  the  Ameri 
can  Colonization  Society  is  unchristian,  because  "unchri%tian 
language"  may  have  been  used  by  some  of  its  friends.  All  that 
would  be  necessary  to  vindicate  the  Bible  Society  in  the  case 
supposed,  would  be  to  show,  that  "  Trinitarians"  employed  op 
posite  sentiments  and  arguments  in  behalf  of  the  society  ; — and 
I  shall  now  proceed  to  show  that  other  friends  of  colonization 
have  entertained  and  expressed  essentially  different  language 
and  sentiments  from  those  you  have  presented.  And  first  let 
me  refer  you  to  one  of  the  resolutions  adopted  at  the  annual 
meeting  in  January,  1833. 

Resolved,  that  the  free  people  of  colour  throughout  the 
United  States,  be  assured,  that  this  society  had  its  origin  in  the 
most  benevolent  desires  towards  them;  that  its  object  is  to  pro 
mote  their  happiness  and  usefulness  ;  and  that  it  believes  this 
can  best  be  done  by  gradually  separating  them  (with  their  own 
consent}  from  the  white  race,  and  establishing  them  in  a  situa 
tion  where  they  may  enjoy  those  privileges  to  which  they  are 
entitled  by  nature  and  their  Creator's  will."  16th  Annual 
Report. 

Is  this  calculated  to  "  aggravate  prejudice  ?" 
"  We  should  direct   our  efforts  to  the  improvement  of  our 
coloured  population  more  than  we  have  done,  and  thus  fit  them 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  21 

for  the  responsible  duties  of  colonists  among  the  pagans  of  their 
colour."  "  I  know  the  history  of  the  cause  of  colonization,  it 
originated  in  the  best  and  purest  motives."  Rev.  Gardiner 
Spring,  D.  D. 

Is  this  unchristian  language  ? 

The  cause  of  colonization  is  the  safest,  truest,  and  most  effi 
cient  auxiliary  of  freedom,  "  under  existing  circumstances." 
Constitution  of  Maryland  in  Liberia. 

"  It  is  the  opinion  of  this  body  that  African  colonization  is 
eminently  calculated  to  benefit  a  long  persecuted,  and  deeply 
injured  race,  by  furnishing  to  the  free  people  of  colour  an  op 
portunity  to  escape  from  the  oppression  which  they  suffer  in 
this  country,"  &c.  Resol.  Gen.  Assent.  Presb.  ch.  May,  1832. 

"  That  the  colonization  of  the  people  of  colour  of  the  United 
States  on  the  coast  of  Africa,  will  not  only  promote  their  own 
temporal  freedom  and  happiness,  but  tend  to  their  moral  im 
provement,"  &c.  Address  of  Maryland  State  Col.  Society. 

Now  in  these  several  quotations  it  will  be  seen  that  colorii- 
zationists  speak  and  write  without  "unchristian  language,"  and 
discover  no  "policy  of  aggravating  prejudice  against  the  free 
blacks."  So  far  from  this,  the  society  and  its  friends  commis- 
serate  the  depressed  condition  of  this  class,  lament  the  extent  of 
that  prejudice,  which  under  present  circumstances  forbid  all 
hope  of  their  elevation,  and  advocate  the  cause  from  a  benevo 
lent  desire  to  promote  their  happiness  and  usefulness.  How 
mistaken  then  is  your  declaration,  that  "  the  society  excuses 
and  justifies  the  oppression  of  the  free  negroes,  and  the  preju 
dices  against  t?iem,"  p.  17.  It  is  true  you  have  found  some 
detached  sentences  of  speeches  and  other  publications  by  colo- 
nizationists,  which  are  made  to  have  the  semblance  of  such  ten 
dency,  though  some  of  the  authors  would  protest  against  this 
use  made  of  their  words,  as  doing  them  injustice.  They  have 
stated  the  depressed  condition  of  the  free  people  of  colour,  in 
slaveholding  and  non-slaveholding  states,  in  strong  language, 
and  represented  the  unconquered  and  unconquerable  nature  of 
that  prejudice  which  perpetuates  their  depression.  But  not  one, 
even  among  those  whom  you  have  quoted,  either  "  excuses  or 
justifies  it," — and  I  marvel  greatly  that  you  should  give  your 
name  to  such  a  charge  without  other  and  better  evidence.  In- 


22  LETTERS  TO  THE 

deed  your  extract  from  the  Address  of  the  Connecticut  Coloni 
zation  Society  is  most  unfairly  made,  for  you  leave  out  the  fol 
lowing  sentence,  which  is  part  of  the  same  paragraph  you  em 
ploy,  and  proves  that  neither  "  excuse  nor  justification"  is  at 
tempted.  The  address  speaks  of  "  things  as  they  art  and  not 
as  they  might,  or  ought  to  be"  and  hence  uses  the  following 
language,  in  direct  connexion  with  what  you  have  quoted,  and 
which  any  reader  will  see,  essentially  varies  its  meaning,  and 
contradicts  your  interpretation. 

"  The  African  in  this  country  belongs  by  birth  to  the  very 
lowest  station  in  society  :  and  from  that  station  he  can  never 
rise,  be  his  talents,  his  enterprise,  his  virtues,  what  they  may. 
They  [the  free  negroes]  constitute  a  class  by  themselves,  a 
class  out  of  which  no  individual  can  be  elevated,  and  below 
which  none  can  be  depressed.  And  this  is  the  difficulty,  the 
invariable  and  insuperable  difficulty,  in  the  way  of  every 
scheme  for  their  benejit.  Much  can  be  done  for  them — much 
has  been  done,  but  still  they  are,  and  in  this  country  always 
must  be,  a  depressed  and  abject  race."  And  hence  "it  is 
taken  for  granted  that  in  present  circumstances,  any  effort  to 
produce  a  general  and  thorough  amelioration  in  the  character 
and  condition  of  the  free  people  of  colour,  must  be  to  a  great 
extent,  fruitless.  In  every  part  of  the  United  States  there  is  a 
broad  and  impassable  line  of  demarcation  between  every  man 
who  has  one  drop  of  African  blood  in  his  veins  and  every  other 
class  in  the  community." 

I  put  it  to  your  candour,  sir,  whether  these  sentiments,  in 
their  original  connexion  with  the  extract  you  have  dismem 
bered,  either  excuse  or  justify  the  oppression  and  prejudice  to 
the  existence  of  which  they  attest.  I  take  it  for  granted  that 
you  admit  the  truth  of  the  description  here  given,  for  the  com 
plaints  in  your  own  book  against  "  oppression  and  prejudice" 
are  all  unfounded,  unless  all  that  is  here  stated  is  true.  And 
its  truth  being  established,  this  "  narrative  of  facts"  on  the  side 
of  colonization,  is  not  more  justly  chargeable  than  is  your  own, 
with  the  guilt  of  "  excusing  or  justifying  it." 

But  you  next  assert,  that  "  the  society  discourages  all  at 
tempts  to  improve  the  condition  of  the  free  blacks."  Allow 
me  again  to  lament  the  deplorable  "want  of  information" 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  23 

which  has  led  you  to  a  repetition  of  this  often  refuted  calumny. 
The  quotations  you  make  are  utterly  irrelevant ;  and  in  signal 
refutation  of  all  you  have  written  to  sustain  your  position,  I  in 
vite  your  attention  to  the  following. 

"  Colonization  tends  to  improve  the  character  and  elevate 
the  condition  of  the  free  people  of  colour,  and  thus  to  take  away 
one  standing  and  very  influential  argument  against  individual 
emancipation  and  general  abolition."  "  Elevate  the  character 
of  the  free  people  of  colour, — let  it  be  seen  that  they  are  men 
indeed — let  the  degrading  associations  which  follow  them  be 
broken  up  by  the  actual  improvement  of  their  character  as  a 
people,  and  negro  slavery  must  rapidly  wither  and  die."  Chris 
tian  Spectator,  a  "  religious  colonization  paper." 

The  following  extract,  in  point,  is  from  the  same  journal. 
"  The  success  of  colonization  will  not  only  bless  the  colonists, 
but  will  react  to  elevate  the  standing  of  those  who  remain  be 
hind  ;  and  from  beyond  the  Atlantic  there  will  come  a  light  to 
beam,  upon  the  degradation  of  the  negroes  in  America." 

Such  are  the  expressed  designs  of  colonizationists,  and  not  a 
shadow  of  testimony  is,  or  can  be  furnished,  that  the  society  or 
its  distinguished  members,  have  ever  "  discouraged  attempts  to 
improve  the  condition  of  the  free  blacks." 

The  most  imposing  evidence  which  this  chapter  contains,  is 
in  your  strictures  upon  the  case  of  Miss  Crandall,  and  her  far 
famed  "  Canterbury  School,"  the  "  Black  Act  of  Connecticut," 
and  the  "  charge  of  Judge  Dagget"  of  that  state.  As  these 
matters  are  entirely  irrelevant,  I  shall  not  discuss  them  here, 
since  neither  are  directly  or  indirectly  connected  with  the  Co 
lonization  Society,  as  every  reader  will  perceive,  notwithstand 
ing  your  laboured  attempt  to  impute  them  all  to  the  society, 
and  its  friends.  In  the  name  of  colonization  I  utterly  repel  the 
insinuation,  that  these  difficulties  in  Connecticut  originated  in 
the  doctrines  or  measures  of  the  American  Colonization  So 
ciety,  nor  would  any  of  them  have  occurred,  had  the  Anti-Sla 
very  Society  never  existed.  They  afford  abundant  confirmation, 
however,  of  the  existence  of  the  "  prejudice  and  oppression" 
which  the  society  deplore  while  they  record,  and  demonstrate 
that  the  statements  of  the  Colonization  Society  in  relation  to 


24  LETTERS  TO  THE 

the  invincible  character  of  this  prejudice  are  neither  misrepre 
sented  nor  overrated. 

Forgive  me,  sir,  when  I  say  that  your  laboured  attempt  to 
identify  the  laws  of  the  slave  states,  and  the  recent  commotions 
in  the  non-slaveholding  states  with  the  Colonization  Society,  af 
ford  ample  and  melancholy  demonstration  of  your  own  senti 
ment  expressed  on  your  46th  page,  that  "  even  good  men  are 
subject  to  erroneous  opinions  and  unwarrantable  prejudices." 
In  my  next  I  shall  notice  the  subject  of  "  compulsory  emigra 
tion." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


SON.  WILLIAM  JAY. 


LETTER  V. 

SIR, 

THE  running  title  of  your  book  for  several  pages  is,  "  Com 
pulsory  Emigration."  This  charge  you  bring  against  the  so 
ciety  was  hardly  to  be  expected,  when  their  constitution  which 
you  quote  is  so  explicit  in  its  contradiction.  But  it  is  in  vain 
that  the  society  points  to  the  "  second  article,"  in  which  it  is 
distinctly  avowed  that  it  will  colonize  the  free  people  of  colour 
only  with  their  own  consent,  and  that  this  is  its  object,  "  ex 
clusively"  its  only  object.  You  even  ridicule  this  provision,  by 
denominating  the  phrase  "  their  own  consent,"  three  talismanic 
words !  and  you  call  the  constitutional  argument  which  the 
society  urges  on  these  words,  a  specious  one,  and  allege  that 
the  society  "  transports  negroes  whose  consent,  they  well  know 
has  been  extorted  from  them  by  the  most  abominable  persecu 
tion  !" 

And  what  is  the  proof  you  offer  ?     Let  us  see. 

The  slave  states,  you  say,  "oppress  these  people,  and  keep 
them  in  ignorance  and  degradation."  And  pray,  is  the  Coloni 
zation  Society  to  be  held  responsible  for  the  acts  of  the  several 
state  legislatures,  most  of  which  were  passed  before  the  society 
was  in  being?  On  what  principle  of  justice  or  equity  can  you 
make  this  appear  ?  Surely  it  is  not  sufficient  to  show  that  these 
same  legislatures  have  passed  resolutions  approving  of  the  so 
ciety,  and  its  objects.  But  nevertheless  on  such  evidence 
alone,  you  do  attempt  to  convict  the  society  of  violating  their 
constitution  by  "  compulsory  emigration."  Not  merely  the 
laws  which  each  state  in  its  sovereign  capacity  sees  fit  to 
adopt,  and  the  decisions  of  their  courts,  but  even  the  speeches 
of  members  in  the  several  houses  of  delegates,  are  all  charged 
upon  the  "  benevolent  colonization  system,"  and  you  go  so  far 
as  to  affirm  that  "  all  look  to  the  Colonization  Society  as  the  in- 
4 


26  LETTERS  TO  THE 

strument,  by  which  the  forcible  expulsion  of  the  free  negroes 
is  to  be  effected !"  and  you  add,  "  Nor  do  they  look  in  vain  !" 

And  here  in  your  own  language,  page  28,  I  am  constrain 
ed  to  say,  "  there  are  occasions  on  which  it  is  treason  to 
truth  and  honour,  if  not  to  religion,  to  suppress  our  indigna 
tion/'  nor  can  I  shrink  from  the  expression  of  my  opinion,  that 
your  "unwarrantable  prejudices"  have  led  you  to  a  course  "in 
consistent  with  either  truth  or  Christianity."  I  shall  not  refer 
to  the  cruelty  and  injustice  of  reprobating  the  society  for  the 
circumstances  which  followed  the  Southampton  massacre,  and 
the  censure  attempted  to  be  fixed  on  the  society  for  removing 
those  who  begged  for  a  passage  to  Liberia,  to  escape  from  the 
inhumanity  of  their  relentless  persecutors,  goaded  to  unwonted 
violence  by  the  scenes  of  blood  they  had  witnessed,  but  I  will 
proceed  to  prove  from  official  documents,  that  it  is  not  true  that 
the  Colonization  Society  ever  countenanced  or  encouraged 
coercion,  but  jias  rigidly  and  universally  disclaimed,  from  the 
beginning,  all  "  compulsory  emigration."  Let  the  reader  *look 
at  the  following  conclusive  evidence  on  this  point. 

"  They  [the  society]  do  not  intend,  and  they  have  not  the 
inclination,  if  they  possessed  the  power,  to  constrain  the  de 
parture  of  any  free  man  of  colour  from  America."  Third  An 
nual  Report. 

"  Nathaniel  Paul,  an  intelligent  and  well  informed  North 
American  of  colour,  who  is  decidedly  opposed  to  the  Coloniza 
tion  Society,  does  not  attempt  to  press  this  accusation,  as 
believed,  either  by  himself  or  his  brethren.  He  only  states 
theirs/ears  that  COERCION  may  hereafter  be  resorted  to  !"  Dr. 
Hodgkin's  Inquiry. 

"  I  cannot  find  in  any  of  the  writings  of  our  opponents,  the 
slightest  attempt  at  proof,  that  the  society  has,  in  any  in 
stance,  violated  its  principle.  They  do  not  so  much  as  hint,  at 
the  occurrence  of  one  example  of  a  coloured  individual  having 
been  conveyed  from  America  to  Africa,  under  the  auspices  of 
the  society,  against  his  own  wish."  Ibid. 

"  But  is  there  nothing  good  in  the  American  Colonization 
Society  ?  Yes,  there  is.  For  the  few  coloured  people  who 
prefer  leaving  their  native  country,  and  emigrating  to  Africa, 
it  is  unquestionably  a  great  blessing !"  Charles  Stewart's 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  27 

letter  to  the  "  Herald  of  Peace."  This  is  the  more  valuable, 
as  the  testimony  of  an  implacable  enemy  of  the  cause,  who 
does  not  insinuate  the  charge  we  are  considering. 

In  one  of  the  Annual   Reports  the  society  officially  declares: 

"  We  disavow  and  reprobate  every  coercive  measure,  we 
discard  all  restraint,  we  ask  no  bounties — we  solicit  no  com 
pulsion  by  which  to  produce  emigration." 

Such  are  the  proofs  which  the  "  Reports,"  to  which  you  seem 
to  have  had  access,  and  other  documents,  furnish  in  contradic 
tion  of  your  allegation ;  and  yet,  sir,  on  the  52d  page  of  your 
book,  you  say, 

"  In  sixteen  years,  2162  have  been  sent  away,  some  at  first  vo 
luntarily,  but  many  of  them  through  COERCION."  And  is  it  too 
much  to  say,  that  you  are  bound  to  sustain  your  veracity  by 
naming  the  time,  place,  and  persons  thus  coerced,  or  to  admit 
that  you  have  here  transgressed  tne  ninth  commandment.  It 
will  not  do  for  you  to  refer  to  the  absurd  and  unfeeling  speech 
of  Mr.  Broadnax,  in  the  Virginia  House  of  Delegates,  on  a  bill 
which  that  body  rejected, — nor  to  the  persecutions  subsequent 
to  the  insurrection  of  Southampton,  for  neither  of  these  have 
any,  the  least  connexion  with  the  society.  And  as  it  is  against 
the  society,  as  such,  that  you  charge  "  compulsory  emigration," 
you  are  again  called  upon  as  in  duty  bound  to  sustain,  or  retract 
it.  Let  me  commend  to  your  sober  reflection  the  sentiment  you 
express  on  the  147th  page  of  your  book :  as  you  are  yourself  of 
"  the  legal  profession,  you  are  aware  of  the  importance  of  preci 
sion  in  all  charges  of  a  criminal  nature,  you  would  not,  sitting 
as  a  criminal  judge,  permit  the  merest  vagabond  to  be  put  on 
his  defence  on  a  vague  charge  of  stealing,  but  would  quash  any 
indictment  that  did  not  specify  the  time  and  place  of  the  offence, 
and  the  property  alleged  to  be  stolen ;  yet  you  do  not  scruple  to 
hold  up  your  fellow  citizens  and  fellow  Christians  to  the  indig 
nation  of  the  public  on  a  charge  destitute  of  all  specification, 
and  unsupported  by  a  particle  of  testimony." 

I  might  here  add,  you  have  yourself  furnished  evidence  in  re 
futation  of  your  own  accusation,  in  the  extract  you  make  from 
the  New-York  Colonization  Society's  Address.  "  We  say  to  the 
free  blacks,  we  think  you  may  improve  your  condition  by  going 
thither,  but  if  you  prefer  remaining  here,  you  will  be  protect'*'* 


28  LETTERS  TO  THE 

and  treated  with  kindness,"  and  this  you  insert  under  the  head 
of  "  compulsory  emigration."  It  is  true  you  contrast  it  with 
the  language  of  the  same  society,  when  addressing  the  legisla 
ture,  and  attempt  to  fix  upon  them  the  same  crime  of  "  coercing 
their  consent  to  go  to  Africa,"  with  what  consistency  every 
reader  will  judge. 

But  you  are  so  indiscriminate  in  your  censoriousness,  that  you 
quote  the  language  of  Mr.  Gurley's  letter,  and  pervert  a  senti 
ment  purely  the  dictate  of  humanity,  to  an  "  encouragement  of 
persecution  and  barbarity."  Mr.  Gurley  says,  "  Should  they  be 
urged  by  any  stress  of  circumstances,  to  seek  an  asylum  be 
yond  the  limits  of  the  United  States,  humanity  and  religion 
will  alike  dictate  that  they  should  be  assisted  to  remove  and  es . 
tablish  themselves  in  freedom  and  prosperity  in  the  land  of 
their  choice  /"  And  pray,  sir,  is  not  here  an  allusion  to  the  case 
you  name  on  a  previous  page,  when  this  same  Mr.  Gurley  says, 
"  Our  friends  at  Norfolk  appealed  to  us,  and  said,  the  people 
were  persecuted,  and  that  it  was  a  matter  of  humanity  to  take 
them.  They  were  driven  from  the  country,  and  begged  to  go 
to  Liberia."  And  yet  while  you  thus  denominate  this  dictate  of 
"  humanity  and  religion,"  by  the  names  of  "  persecution  and 
barbarity,"  you  affirm,  that  you  would  have  us  say  to  the 
authors  of  these  atrocities,  "you  shall  gain  nothing  by  your 
cruelty,  through  our  instrumentality ;  we  will  not  encourage 
your  farther  persecutions,  by  removing  those  whose  consent 
you  have  obtained  by  such  unjustifiable  means."  Truly  this 
would  be  to 

"  Keep  the  word  of  promise  to  the  ear 
And  break  it  to  the  hope." 

Pray  what  would  be  the  effect  on  the  victims  of  these  cc  bar 
barities,"  if  the  Colonization  Society  were  to  treat  them  as 
you  recommend.  Would  there  be  either  "humanity  or  re 
ligion,"  under  such  "  a  stress  of  circumstances"  as  those  you 
refer  to,  in  abandoning  the  poor  persecuted  people,  and  refusing 
to  deliver  them,  when  they  "  begged  to  go  to  Liberia,"  and  in 
voked  the  humanity  of  their  friends  to  appeal  in  their  behalf. 
Verily,  if  for  the  purpose  of  rebuking  these  atrocities,  your  recom 
mendation  were  adopted  our  "  tender  mercies  would  be  cruelty." 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  29 

I  deplore  the  necessity  imposed  upon  me,  thus  to  bring  be 
fore  the  reader,  so  flagrant  evidence  of  "  want  of  information," 
as  is  furnished  on  every  page  of  your  book  but ;  having  under 
taken  this  unpleasant  task,  I  must  proceed  through  the  whole. 
In  my  next,  I  shall  notice  your  3d  chapter. 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


30  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  VI. 

SIR, 

IN  your  3d  chapter  you  direct  the  reader  to  the  influence  of 
the  society  upon  Africa  in  the  suppression  of  the  slave-trade. 
Even  Charles  Stewart,  the  type  of  Garrison,  and  who  has  been 
imported,  for  the  purpose  of  vilifying  colonization,  admits  that 
the  society  "  interrupts  the  African  slave-trade  within  its 
own  limits,"  and  adds,  that  "  the  least  interruption  to  that  nefa 
rious  traffic,  is  an  unspeakable  good  /"  But  I  regret  to  find, 
sir,  that  so  far  from  admitting  even  this  influence  of  coloniza 
tion,  you  accuse  the  society  and  its  members  of  "  ignorance, 
rash  assertion,  and  honest  confession,"  from  the  "  astonishing 
medley"  of  which,  you  furnish  a  few  choice  specimens. 

I  have  before  reminded  you,  that  the  American  Colonization 
Society  is  not  a  society  for  the  extirpation  of  slavery,  as  you 
have  mistaken  it  to  be,  nor  is  it  a  society  for  the  suppression  of 
the  slave-trade,  as  you  now  insinuate  ;  but  I  repeat  that  it  is 
simply  "  a  society  for  establishing  a  colony  on  the  coast  of  Af 
rica."  Nevertheless,  among  other  collateral  benefits,  the  influ 
ence  of  the  colony  in  the  suppression  of  the  slave-trade,  is  pro 
ven  by  testimony,  which  nothing  you  have  said  can  impeach. 

The  following  extracts  will  show  that  the  intention  of  the 
society  to  suppress  the  African  slave-trade  has  been  often  de 
clared. 

"  Resolved,  That  a  committee  be  appointed  to  memorialize 
the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  requesting  that  they  will 
take  such  further  steps  as  to  their  wisdom  may  seem  proper,  to 
ensure  the  entire  abolition  of  the  African  slave-trade."  3d  Re 
port,  1820. 

"  How  is  this  trade  to  be  abolished  ?  Experience  teaches  us 
that  no  law,  no  treaties  stop  it,  though  much  more  might  be 
done.  By  laws  and  treaties  it  is  already  denounced,  and  yet 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  31 

nearly  100,000  slaves  are  annually  taken  from  Africa,  the  vic 
tims  of  cormorant,  never-sated  avarice.  To  suppress  this  trade, 
it  must  be  made  physically  impossible.  We  must  line  the 
western  coast  of  Africa  with  civilized  settlements,"  &c.  14tb 
Report. 

Your  attempt  to  depreciate  the  good  done  by  the  colony  at 
Sierra  Leone,  can  only  be  attributed  to  your  excessive  zeal 
against  the  whole  scheme  of  colonization,  for  you  must  have 
known  that  multiplied  and  authentic  facts  are  against  you. 

Your  own  excellent  father  expresses  his  opinion  in  a  letter  to 
Mr.  Wilberforce,  on  the  subject  of  the  "  African  Institution  of 
Great  Britain,  for  promoting  civilization  and  improvement  in 
Africa."  This  institution,  as  you  well  know,  was  founded  with 
a  view  to  the  efficiency  and  success  of  the  colony  at  Sierra 
Leone,  in  suppressing  the  slave-trade.  Mr.  John  Jay  says,  of  this 
society,  "  It  is  pleasing  to  behold  a  nation  assiduously  cultivating 
the  arts  of  peace  and  humanity  in  the  midst  of  war,  and  while 
strenuously  fighting  for  their  all,  kindly  extending  the  blessings 
of  Christianity  and  civilization  to  distant  countries." 

In  Mr.  Walsh's  Notes  of  Brazil,  vol.  ii.  p.  286,  it  is  stated, 
that  "from  1819  to  1828,  a  period  of  nine  years,  there  were 
captured  and  emancipated  by  British  vessels  stationed  at  Sierra 
Leone,  13,821  slaves,  averaging  about  1400  per  annum."  This 
single  fact,  which  you  would  scarcely  presume  to  deny,  speaks 
volumes  in  refutation  of  your  attempt  to  deprive  that  colony  ot 
the  merit  of  contributing  to  the  suppression  of  the  slave-trade, 
which,  in  that  case,  was  one  of  the  express  objects  for  which 
its  benevolent  founders  established  it.  That  it  has  effected  all 
that  is  desirable  is  not  pretended  by  its  friends,  but  so  far  as  it 
has  produced  this  effect,  it  has  been  an  unspeakable  blessing, 
which  it  is  a  burning  shame  to  undervalue,  much  more  to  affirm, 
as  you  do,  that  it  has  "  actually  promoted  the  slave-trade!" 

In  turning  your  attention  to  Liberia,  however,  you  seem  to 
find  still  greater  satisfaction,  in  an  effort  to  convince  your  read 
ers,  that  no  influence  whatever  has  been  exerted  on  the  slave- 
trade  by  that  colony.  Is  your  "  want  of  information"  again  to 
be  received  as  your  apology.  I  confess,  sir,  that  I  am  amazed 
at  this  portion  of  your  book.  How  came  you  to  suppress  the 
facts  which  must  have  been  known  to  you,  of  the  industry,  zeal, 


32  LETTERS  TO  THE 

and  success,  with  which  the  lamented  Ashrnun  engaged  in  the 
suppression  of  the  slave-trade  in  the  vicinity  of  Liberia.  Had 
you  never  read  the  expedition  he  undertook  against  that  noto- 
rious*slave-mart,  Trade  Town,  in  which  three  vessels  were  cap 
tured,  53  slaves,  and  subsequently  178,  were  liberated,  and  the 
establishment  destroyed  ?  Had  it  pleased  Providence  to  prolong 
his  valuable  life  a  few  years  longer,  you  would  have  been 
spared  the  satisfaction  you  seem  to  take,  in  the  failure  of  his 
purpose  to  "banish  the  accursed  traffic  from  the  whole  line  of 
coast  comprehended  between  Cape  Montserado  and  Trade 
Town,  both  inclusive."  For  after  announcing  to  the  society 
that  he  had  interdicted  the  trade  from  that  part  of  the  coast,  he 
adds,  "  Our  hopes  are  high  that  the  world  is  to  hear  little  or 
nothing  more  of  the  ravages  of  this  detestable  and  outlawed 
traffic  from  this  part  of  the  coast."  It  is  true  that  his  sanguine 
hopes  were  not  fully  realized,  and  it  is  lamentable  to  learn  that 
the  society,  after  having  expressed  their  confidence  that*the 
traffic  would  be  utterly  extinguished  on  the  whole  coast,  nomi 
nally  included  in  the  colony,  have  not  fully  attained  this  laud 
able  object.  The  colonists  have  done  much,*  and  are  preparing 
to  do  much  more  in  this  department,  and  instead  of  employing  your 
pen  in  depreciating  their  efforts,  it  had  been  more  in  character 
if  you  had  recorded  a  tribute  to  the  living  and  the  dead,  for 
their  services  to  the  cause  of  humanity,  memorable  examples 
of  which  the  history  of  the  colony  has  furnished. 

But  I  forbear  to  enlarge  on  this  subject,  but  would  simply 
ask  you,  sir,  whether  charity  and  candour  did  not  furnish  you 
with  a  better  interpretation  of  the  motives  of  the  society  and 
its  friends,  than  the  "  ignorance,  rashness,  and  credulousness" 
of  which  you  accuse  them.  When  the  society  encourage  the 
friends  of  humanity  by  the  expression  of  the  high  hopes  of  its 
friends  and  agents,  that  the  slave-trade  is  suppressed  within  an 
hundred  miles  of  Monrovia,  and  when  afterward,  it  publishes 


*  Mr.  J.  F.  C.  Finlay,  writing  from  Millsburg,  in  the  colony  of  14- 
beriar  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Wilson,  of  Cincinnati,  under  date  of  6th  De 
cember,  1834,  says, 

"  The  colony  of  Liberia  has  done  at  least  five  times  as  much  to 
wards  abolishing  the  slave-trade  on  this  coast,  as  the  whole  of  the 
United  States." 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  33 

letters  from  its  agents  that  the  avarice  and  cupidity  of  traders, 
and  the  treachery  of  native  kings,  have  again  polluted  the  soil, 
by  renewing  the  crime  which  they  had  hoped  was  banished 
from  the  coast,  for  even  a  greater  distance  ;  is  it  fair,  liberal,  or 
just,  for  you  to  impeach  their  motives,  and  decry  their  well-meant 
endeavours  ?  Does  not  the  fact  that  these  seeming  variations 
in  their  statements  are  published  by  the  society  itself,  demon 
strate  their  candour  and  veracity  1  And  ought  not  the  society, 
after  discovering  that  this  abominable  traffic  yet  lingers  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  their  settlements,  to  stimulate  the  zeal  and  be 
nevolence  of  its  friends  to  increasing  efforts  for  its  utter  exter 
mination  by  publishing  it  to  the  world  ?  I  blush  that  you  should 
labour  with  a  zeal  worthy  of  a  better  cause,  to  deprive  the  so 
ciety  of  the  merit  it  is  admitted,  even  by  its  enemies,  to  have 
earned,  that  of  interrupting  the  slave-trade.  And  your  at 
tempt  to  disparage  the  character  of  the  colonists,  by  impeaching 
them  as  "  ignorant  and  depraved  negroes,"  shows  on  your  part 
a  most  strange  incongruity  with  other  parts  of  your  book.  They 
have  shown  thus  far  that  they  deserve  better  treatment,  than  to 
have  it  insinuated  that  they  will  not  resist  the  "  temptations  of 
a  lucrative  commerce." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


34  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  VII. 

SIR, 

IN  your  4th  chapter  you  assail  the  missionary  influence  ot 
the  colony,  so  determined  do  you  seem  that  "  no  good  thing 
shall  come  out  of  this  Nazareth."  And  in  the  notice  I  am 
constrained  to  give  to  this  chapter,  I  find  the  most  painful  part 
of  my  duty.  Recognising  you  in  the  capacity  of  a  Christian 
professor,  I  can  scarcely  suppress  my  feelings  when  I  find 
such  a  spirit  of  ridicule  and  satire  as  you  seem  to  have  culti 
vated  on  this  part  of  your  subject,  but  still  more,  when  I  disco 
ver  the  monstrous  extravagances  and  mistakes  into  which*you 
have  fallen.  I  am  bound  to  suppose  that  you  unfeignedly  be 
lieve  what  you  say,  but  I  venture  to  predict  that  you  will  find 
few  readers,  any  where,  equally  credulous. 

Such  assertions  as  the  following  are  made  in  your  book : 

"  They  seek  for  the  regeneration  of  Africa,  by  emigrants  who 
when  in  the  United  States  were  denounced  as  a  curse  and 
contagion  wherever  they  reside  !"  «. 

"  Of  this  great  company  of  preachers,  about  3000  of  them 
have  already  set  up  their  tabernacle  at  Liberia !" 

"  Pious  colonizationists  would,  themselves,  be  shocked  at  the 
proposal  of  disgorging  on  the  islands  of  the  Pacific  the  tenants 
of  our  prisons  under  the  pretext  of  instructing  the  natives  in 
religion  and  the  arts^  and  yet  they  flatter  themselves,  that  emi 
grants,  who,  by  their  own  showing,  are  less  intelligent  and 
scarcely  less  guilty  than  our  prisoners,  will  by  undergoing  a 
SALT  WATER  BAPTISM,  land  in  Africa  wholly  regenerated,  and 
qualified  as  heralds  of  the  cross  to  convert  millions  and  mil 
lions  to  the  faith  of  the  gospel." 

These  and  similar  declarations  can  scarcely  be  ascribecN;o 
the  "  want  of  information,"  sir,  for  a  moiety  of  the  labour  you 
have  used  in  penning  them,  would  have  satisfied  you  that  no 
member  or  friend  of  the  Colonization  Society  ever  entertained 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  35 

or  expressed  such  preposterous  anomalies  as  you  gravely  ascribe 
to  your  "  fellow  Christians." 

It  is  not  true  that  the  regeneration  of  Africa  was  ever  con 
templated  by  means  of  such  emigrants  as  you  describe.  It  is 
not  true,  that  "  a  great  company  of  3000  preachers"  were  ever 
supposed,  by  any  body  but  yourself,  to  have  set  up  their  taberna 
cle  at  Liberia.  It  is  not  true,  that  the  Colonization  Society  ex 
pect  by  a  "  salt  water  baptism,"  as  you  profanely  assert,  to  con 
vert  emigrants  "  scarcely  less  guilty  than  our  prisoners"  into 
"  heralds  of  the  cross."  These,  and  other  specimens  of  your 
unmusical  and  unmelodious  "  poetry,"  I  repeat,  are  not  true. 
And  yet  it  is  true,  that  "  pious  Christians"  do  regard  the  esta 
blishment  of  the  colony  as  opening  "  a  great  and  effectual  door" 
for  the  preaching  of  that  gospel  which  is  the  "  power  of  God 
unto  salvation,"  and  to  which  gospel  they  look  for  the  regene 
ration  of  Africa.  Nor  will  the  sneering  or  scoffing,  either  of 
Christians  or  infidels,  should  they  be  afflicted  with  such  treat 
ment  from  both  these  classes,  at  all  diminish  their  zeal  or  con 
fidence. 

If  you  found  it  in  your  heart,  sir,  to  treat  the  living  among 
your  fellow  citizens  and  fellow  Christians,  with  so  much  of  con 
tempt  and  satire,  surely  you  might  have  spared  the  memory  of 
the  pious  dead.  Or  must  your  "  want  of  information"  again 
shield  you  from  the  reproach  of  treating  the  lamented  Andrews, 
and  Bacon,  and  Carey,  and  Cox,  and  Cloud,  and  Laird,  and 
Wright,  whose  ashes  lie  beneath  the  sands'of  Africa,  with  con 
tumely  and  gainsaying  ?  Do  you  not  know  that  among  those  to 
whom  colonizationists  look  for  the  regeneration  of  Africa,  there 
are  yet  living  missionaries  of  your  own  and  other  denomina 
tions,  in  whose  behalf  the  whole  church  glorifies  God,  who  are 
truly  "  heralds  of  the  cross"  consecrated  to  the  work  of  evan 
gelizing  Africa  ?  Are  you  ignorant  of  what  every  body  else 
knows,  that  there  are  many  among  the  emigrants  who  have  the 
confidence  of  the  whole  Christian  community,  and  whose  claims 
to  personal  piety  here,  have  been  confirmed  by  their  deportment 
there  ?  And  have  you  yet  to  learn  that  among  these,  there  are 
already  in  the  colony,  ministers  of  the  Presbyterian,  Baptist, 
Methodist,  and  Episcopal  churches,  who  are  truly  heralds  of 
the  cross,  and  that  others  of  similar  character,  like  Gloster, 


36  LETTERS  TO  THE 

Simpson,  and  Archy  Moore,  are  even  now  passing  through  what 
you,  in  a  spirit  approaching  to  impiety,  call  "  a  salt  water  bap 
tism."  And  are  these  men  worthy  of  the  "pious  sneers"  and 
profane  mockery  of  a  Christian  brother  ?  Or  are  those  who 
"  unfeignedly  believe  in  the  missionary  influence  of  such,  and 
offer  contributions  and  prayers  for  the  regeneration  of  Africa 
through  their  instrumentality,"  to  be  held  up  to  public  "  odium 
and  ridicule?"  If  such  be  the  effect  which  anti-slavery  senti 
ments  have  produced  in  you,  sir,  forgive  me  if  I  exclaim,  "  My 
soul,  come  not  thou  into  their  secret.  To  their  assembly  mine 
honour,  be  not  thou  united  !" 

But  while  you  vilify  the  character  of  the  colonists,  ascribing 
to  them,  en  masse,  the  language  employed  by  various  speakers 
in  describing  the  wretchedness  and  depravity  of  multitudes  of 
the  free  blacks  here,  and  which  is  by  them  justly  attributed  to 
the  neglect  and  oppressions  they  suffer  in  our  country,  and  while 
you  represent  the  society  as  sending  "  ship  loads  of  vagabonds" 
to  Africa  as  missionaries,  in  the  true  spirit  and  style  of  Garrison- 
ism  ;  I  am  amazed  to  discover  that  you  so  "  deeply  regret  the  at 
tempt  lately  made  by  distinguished  colonizationists  to  select  for 
emigrants  the  moral,  industrious,  and  temperate."  And  pray, 
let  me  ask  the  cause  of  this  deep  regret  ?  If  the  "  corrupt,  de 
praved,  and  guilty"  character  of  our  colonists  does  not  suit  you, 
why  should  you  regret  that  an  attempt  is  made  to  "  change 
their  character  in  future  ?"  "  We  have  piped  unto  you,*"  and 
you  have  not  danced,  we  have  mourned  unto  you,  and  you  have 
not  lamented."  Is  there  no  way  to  please  you  ?  Alas,  you  are 
concerned  for  our  "  moral  rectitude,"  which  you  say  is  in  dan 
ger,  unless  we  "  abandon  colonization  as  a  means  of  relieving 
the  country  from  the  nuisance  of  a  free  coloured  population, 
and  from  the  guilt  and  curse  of  slavery."  Suffer  me  yet  again 
to  remind  you,  that  the  society  does  not  "  profess  to  be  a  reme 
dy  for  slavery,"  nor  to  "  remove  any  nuisance,"  but  simply  to 
establish  a  colony  of  free  people  of  colour  in  Africa,  with  their 
own  consent,  so  that  your  fears  for  our  "  moral  rectitude"  may 
find  an  object  nearer  home.  Your  reference  to  the  Rev.  ^)r. 
Beecher,  whom  you  accuse  of  "  gross  inconsistency,  not  to  use 
a  harsher  term,"  is  founded  on  the  following  resolution  which 
the  doctor  offered  at  a  meeting  in  Cincinnati. 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  37 

"  Resolved,  That  the  establishment  of  colonies  in  Africa,  by 
the  selection  of  coloured  persons,  who  are  moraLt  industrious, 
and  temperate,  is  eminently  calculated  to  advance  the  cause  of 
civilization  and  religion  among  the  benighted  native  popula 
tion  of  that  continent,  as  well  as  to  afford  facilities  to  the  va 
rious  missionary  societies  for  the  prosecution  of  their  pious 
designs." 

This  resolution,  you  say,  is  "  utterly  without  point  or  mean 
ing,"  thus  placing  under  the  ban  of  your  reprobation  its  excel 
lent  author  for  the  sin  of  colonizationism.  And  is  there  no 
gross  inconsistency  here,  "  not  to  use  a  harsher  term  ?"  Have 
you  not  written  a  chapter  in  condemnation  of  the  society  for 
not  selecting  their  emigrants,  and  availed  yourself  of  all  the 
"  evil  speaking"  that  has  ever  been  uttered  against  the  colony 
for  intemperance,  indolence,  and  immorality,  and  now  you  de 
clare  a  resolution  to  be  utterly  without  point  or  meaning,  which 
proposes  in  future  to  select  the  "  moral,  industrious,  and  tempe 
rate."  I  forbear  to  pain  you  by  enlarging,  let  reason  and  con 
science  speak. 

But  you  discover  a  still  more  gross  inconsistency  in  this  reso 
lution,  since  you  say  that  the  selection  proposed,  is  "utterly  at 
variance  with  and  directly  opposed  to  the  avowed  objects  of  the 
society."  And  here  again  you  repeat  the  old  blunder,  that  the 
objects  of  the  society  are  the  abolition  of  slavery,  which  you 
try  to  prove  by  quoting  another  resolution,  that  they  cherish 
the  society  among  other  reasons,  because  of  its  influence  to 
abolish  slavery.  And  can  you  make  no  distinction  between 
the  influence  collaterally  exerted  by  the  society  and  its  objects? 
I  refer  you  again  to  the  constitution,  which  may  enlighten  you, 
that  you  may  not  again  repeat  this  day  dream,  by  which  you 
are  yourself  bewildered,  and  mislead  your  readers. 

But  it  seems  you  are  not  content  with  impugning  the  intelli 
gence  of  your  "  Christian  brethren,"  but  their  integrity  also, 
for  you  allege,  that  this  "  recent  talk  about  select  emigrants 
may  be  attributed  to  EXPEDIENCY."  "  Funds  are  low  and  tem 
perance  popular,  and  all  at  once  we  hear  about  temperance  co 
lonies  and  select  emigrants."  "  Surely,  colonizationists  pay 
but  a  poor  compliment  to  their  own  candour,  or  the  common 
sense  of  the  community.  The  truth  is,  there  never  has  been 


38  LETTERS    TO   THE 

nor  never  will  be,  a  selection  made  !"  Here  then  we  have  the 
character  of  your  "  fellow  Christians"  drawn  by  yourself,  and 
if  there  be  any  truth  in  the  description,  "  colonizationists"  are 
not  only  destitute  of  candour  or  common  sense,  but  equally  des 
titute  of  any  measure  of  principle  or  veracity.  I  leave  you  to  en 
joy  the  self-complacency  which  are  perusal  of  this  paragraph  will 
afford  you,  and  pass  on,  without  condescending  to  criticise  it, 
for  the  reason  that  I  should  disdain,  even  to  deny  it. 

Your  last  charge  in  this  letter,  is,  that  "  the  professed  ulti 
mate  object  of  the  society  is  to  remove  the  whole  coloured  po 
pulation  to  Africa,  without  any  selection  whatever."  Thus 
y»u  blunder  on,  whenever  you  speak  of  the  objects  of  the  soci 
ety  j  you  betray  the  same  "  want  of  information"  at  every  step, 
and  in  this  case,  it  is  marvellous  how  you  should  make  a  quota 
tion  which  disproves  your  own  statement,  in  the  extract  from 
the  African  Repository,  where  a  committee  of  the  board  say  that 
the  free  should  "be  removed  as  fast  as  their  own  consentican 
be  obtained^  and  as  the  means  can  be  found  for  their  removal, 
and  for  their  proper  establishment  in  Africa."  Now  if  you,  sir, 
have  faith,  that  the  consent  of  the  whole  coloured  population 
will  ever  be  obtained,  and  that  the  means  will  ever  be  found 
for  the  removal  and  proper  establishment  of  the  whole  in  Afri 
ca,  you  are  more  credulous  than  any  colonizationist  now  living. 
The  society,  I  remind  you  again,  has  no  professed  object  but 
the  exclusive  one  contained  in  the  second  article  of  the  consti 
tution. 

If  then  the  system  of  African  Colonization  is,  as  you  say, 
"  full  of  absurdities,  and  contradictions,  and  evils,  which  are 
NOT  SEEN,  because  they  are  concealed  by  a  veil  of  prejudice," 
I  fear  that  this  veil  yet  obstructs  your  own  vision,  for, 

"  Optics  sharp  it  needs,  I  ween, 
To  see  what  is  not  to  be  seen." 

And  when  you  think  you  see  them,  and  attempt  to  put  your 
finger  on  them — they  are  not  there  ! 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY. 


LETTER  VIII. 

SIR, 

I  COME  now  to  the  "Influence  of  the  Society  on  Slavery," 
which  is  the  subject  of  your  fifth  chapter. 

And  here  the  reader  will  perceive,  that  you  only  speak  of 
the  moral  influence  expected  by  the  friends  of  colonization  to 
result  from  the  society,  and  no  longer  urge  or  pretend,  what 
you  have  elsewhere  asserted,  that  it  "professes  to  be  a 
remedy  for  slavery."  And  yet  you  deny  that  it  exerts  this  in 
fluence  "  in  any  degree,"  and  after  classifying  the  kinds  of  in 
fluence  which  must  operate,  you  say,  "  it  will  not  be  pretended 
that  the  society  addresses  itself  to  the  conscience  of  the  slave 
holder."  The  "want  of  information,"  not  " to  use  a  harsher 
term,1'  under  which  you  venture  this  ridiculous  assertion,  is 
absolutely  astounding  to  your  friends,  and  shows  conclusively, 
if  we  had  not  elsewhere  had  cause  to  deplore  the  truth  of  your 
own  sentiments,  that  "  good  men  and  good  Christians"  are  led 
by  their  zeal  against  the  society  to  hazard  their  reputation  by 
"opinions  at  variance  with  truth  and  Christianity." 

I  would  here  invite  your  attention  to  the  following  quotations, 
and  ask,  is  there  no  appeal  to  the  conscience  here  ? 

"  On  the  subject  of  slavery  we  must  express  ourselves  briefly, 
yet  boldly.  We  have  heard  of  slavery  as  it  exists  in  Asia,  and 
Africa,  and  Turkey ; — we  have  heard  of  the  feudal  slavery 
under  which  the  peasantry  of  Europe  have  groaned  from  the 
days  of  Alaric,  until  now ;  but  excepting  only  the  horrible  sys 
tem  of  the  West  India  Islands,  we  have  never  heard  of  slavery 
in  any  country,  ancient  or  modern,  Pagan,  Mohammedan,  or 
Christian,  so  terrible  in  its  character,  so  pernicious  in  its 
tendency,  so  remediless  in  its  anticipated  results,  as  the 
slavery  which  exists  in  these  United  States."  Appendix  to 
7th  Report,  1824. 


40  LETTERS  TO  THE 

*  The  friends  of  human  liberty  are  enlisting  under  the  banner 
of  colonization,  and  the  advocates  of  perpetual  despotism  are 
arranging  themselves  under  the  banner  of  its  adversaries,  and 
it  requires  not  the  spirit  of  prophecy  to  foretell,  whose  princi 
ples  in  this  age  of  reason  and  religion,  and  in  this  country  of 
universal  intelligence,  will  become  universally  popular."  Ap 
pendix  to  16th  Report,  1833. 

But  Mr.  Elliot  Cresson  is  still  more  explicit,  as  may  be  seen 
by  the  following  extract  from  his  address :  "  Instead  of  de 
nouncing  an  evil  which  they  have  not  power  to  overthrow,  they 
have  recourse  to  the  more  sure  but  gradual  mode  of  removing  it, 
by  enlightening  the  CONSCIENCES  and  convincing  the  judgments 
of  slaveholders"  Were  it  not  for  your  deplorable  "  want  of 
information,"  it  would  be  needless  to  inform  you,  that  the 
speaker  last  named,  has  himself  been  instrumental  in  effecting 
the  emancipation  of  scores,  if  not  hundreds,  of  slaves.  When, 
alas  !  when  shall  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society,  its  offi 
cers  and  managers,  and  its  eulogist  included,  promote  abolition 
to  the  extent  which  this  single  individual  has  done  ?  Or,  ra 
ther,  when  will  they  all  cease  to  obstruct  and  hinder  the  cause 
of  freedom  by  their  angry  denunciation,  without  effecting  the 
emancipation  of  a  single  slave  ? 

To  prove  that  such  appeals  are  not  of  recent  date,  and  that 
the  moral  influence  of  the  society  was,  from  the  beginning,  ex 
pected  to  be  operative  in  promoting  emancipation,  I  refer  y  oik  to 
the  avowals  made  in  the  early  reports. 

"  That  they  considered  slavery  a  great  moral  and  political 
evil,  and  cherished  the  hope  and  belief,  that  the  successful  pro 
secution  of  their  object  would  offer  powerful  motives  and  exert 
a  persuasive  influence  in  favour  of  voluntary  emancipation." 
— 2d  Report. 

"The  hope  of  the  gradual  and  utter  abolition  of  slavery,  in 
a  manner  consistent  with  the  rights,  interest,  and  happiness  of 
society,  ought  never  to  be  abandoned" — Ibid. 

And  by  the  fourteenth  report,  it  is  shown,  that  the  views  of 
the  society  are  unchanged.  ^ 

"  The  effect  of  this  institution,  if  its  prosperity  shall  equal 
our  wishes,  will  be  alike  propitious  to  every  interest  of  our  do- 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  41 

mestic  society ;  and  should  it  lead,  as  we  may  fairly  hope  it 
will,  to  the  slow  but  gradual  abolition  of  slavery,  it  will  wipe 
from  our  political  institutions  the  only  blot  which  stains  them ; 
— and  in  palliation  of  which,  we  shall  not  be  at  liberty  to  plead 
the  excuse  of  moral  necessity,  until  we  shall  have  honestly 
exerted  all  the  means  which  we  possess  for  its  EXTINCTION." 

"But  it  may  be  said,  that  the  society  has  expressed  the  opi 
nion,  that  slavery  is  a  moral  and  political  evil  ;  and  that  it  has 
regarded  the  scheme  of  colonization  as  presenting  motives,  and 
exerting  a  moral  influence  on  the  south,  favourable  to  gradual 
and  voluntary  emancipation.  This  is  true,  and  it  is  this,  be 
yond  all  question,  which  has  secured  to  it  the  countenance  and 
patronage  of  our  most  profound  and  sagacious  statesmen,  and 
given  to  this  scheme  a  peculiar  attractiveness  and  glory  in  the 
view  of  the  enlightened  friends  of  their  country  and  of  man 
kind." 

But  a  volume  might  be  written  of  the  proofs  which  the  pub 
lications  of  the  society  furnish  in  refutation  of  the  mistake  you 
have  here  committed,  in  saying,  that  "addresses  to  the  con 
science  are  not  authorized  by  the  constitution,  and  are  disclaim 
ed  by  the  society." 

Hear  the  disinterested  opinion  of  such  men  as  the  Rt.  Rev. 
and  venerable  Bishop  White,  and  Roberts  Vaux,  of  Philadel 
phia,  when  they  say,  "  We  fully  belieVe  that  if  the  society  be 
amply  sustained,  it  will  ultimately  put  an  end  to  the  odious 
foreign  traffic  in  human  flesh,  and  contribute  more  effectually  to 
promote  and  insure  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  United 
States,  than  any  plan  that  has  hitherto  been  devised."  And 
have  we  not  here  the  testimony  of  those  excellent  men,  that  the 
moral  influence  of  the  colony  was  that  to  which  they  looked 
by  its  operation  upon  the  consciences  of  slaveholders,  for  the 
voluntary  and  peaceful  abolition  of  slavery. 

But  I  forbear  to  multiply  quotations,  and  proceed  to  show 
you,  sir,  that  your  injustice  to  the  society  is  not  only  proven  by 
their  professions,  but  by  their  practice.  The  society  does  not 
merely  " promise"  to  promote  abolition,  but  exerts  a  mighty  and 
successful  moral  influence  in  actually  abolishing  slavery. 
And  here  I  will  not  refer  you  to  the  truth,  which  he  who  runs 
may  read,  that  in  Kentucky,  Delaware,  Maryland,  and  even 
5* 


42  LETTERS   TO   THE 

Virginia  itself,  it  is  now  openly  avowed  that  "  colonization 
doctrines  have  sealed  the  death  warrant  of  slavery  /"  Hence 
the  pro-slavery  party  have  declared  that  "  colonization  and 
emancipation  are  synonimous  terms,  and  that  the  approach  of 
the  former  must  be  resisted  /"  At  a  meeting  of  the  same  party 
in  Charleston,  the  following  toast  was  given,  "  May  the  infer 
nal  regions  soon  be  colonized  with  the  officers  of  the  Coloniza 
tion  Society  !"  And  while  you  are  labouring  with  your  mis 
guided  associates  in  the  north,  to  hold  up  the  Colonization  So 
ciety,  as  hypocritical  in  its  professions  to  exert  a  moral  influ 
ence  towards  the  voluntary  and  utter  abolition  of  slavery,  you 
are  leagued  with  "  all  the  advocates  of  the  negro's  perpetual 
bondage,  who  are  the  bitter  uncompromising  enemies  of  the  so 
ciety."  The  Rev.  J.  M.  Danforth  states  on  his  own  personal 
knowledge,  that  in  South  Carolina,  "  the  society,  and  every 
thing  connected  with  it,  are  held  in  extreme  abhorrence  by  our 
leading  men,  our  politicians  and  wealthy  planters.  It  is  so  un 
popular  an  institution  that  very  few  name  it  publicly, — it  is* re 
garded  here  as  a  northern  scheme  to  wrest  from  us  our  slaves." 
In  your  anti-colonization  efforts  then,  you  are  associated  in 
action  with  the  very  men,  whose  character  as  slaveholders  is 
so  odious,  that  you  deprecate  their  connexion  with  the  coloni 
zation  cause,  as  an  unpardonable  sin.  Let  me  conjure  you,  sir, 
no  longer  to  be  "jostled  by  the  trafficker  in  human  flesh,"  in 
your  crusade  against  the  society  or  its  benevolent  objects^bul 
abandon  the  "  bad  eminence"  to  which  your  "  want  of  informa 
tion"  has  unhappily  raised  you. 

Let  me  now  invite  your  attention,  sir,  to  a  few  facts,  which 
no  sophistry  can  evade,  and  until  you  can  show  a  similar  list, 
and  these  are  only  a  few  among  many,  had  you  not  better 
lower  your  exclusive  pretensions,  to  anti-slavery  practice, 
however  you  may  cling  to  a  theory,  which  until  you  effect  a 
single  instance  of  emancipation,  I  must  denominate  in  your 
own  style  to  be  the  "baseless  fabric  of  a  vision,"  and  call  upon 
you  in  turn  to  give 

"  To  airy  nothing,  ^ 

A  local  habitation  and  a  name !' 

The   following  manumissions  are  the  legitimate  result  of  the 


HON.   WILLIAM   JAY.  43 

"moral  influence"  of  the  Colonization  Society,  which  you 
deny  and  even  ridicule  ! 

"  *It  would  be  endless  to  enumerate  the  cases  of  this  kind  that 
have  occurred.  Some  of  them  must  be  recorded,  that  the  acts 
and  the  names  of  the  parties,  where  known,  may  have  the  ap 
plause  to  which  they  are  entitled,  and,  what  is  of  more  conse 
quence,  that  they  may  serve  as  stimuli  to  others,  to  follow  the 
noble  example. 

"  A  lady,  near  Charleston,  Va.  liberated  all  her  slaves,  ten 
in  number,  to  be  sent  to  Liberia  ;  and  moreover  purchased  two, 
whose  families  were  among  her  slaves.  For  the  one  she  gave 
$450,  and  for  the  other  $350. 

"  The  late  William  Fitzhugh  bequeathed  their  freedom  to  alt 
his  slaves,  after  a  certain  fixed  period,  and  ordered  that  their 
expenses  should  be  paid  to  whatsoever  place  they  should  think 
proper  to  go.  And,  '  as  an  encouragement  to  them  to  emigrate 
to  the  American  colony  on  the  coast  of  Africa,  where,'  adds 
the  will,  '  I  believe  their  happiness  will  be  more  permanently 
secured,  I  desire  not  only  that  the  expenses  of  their  emigration 
be  paid,  but  that  the  sum  of  fifty  dollars  be  paid  to  each  one  so 
emigrating,  on  his  or  her  arrival  in  Africa.' 

"  David  Shriver,  of  Frederick  co.  Maryland,  ordered  by  his 
will,  that  all  his  slaves,  thirty  in  number,  should  be  emancipa 
ted,  and  that  proper  provision  should  be  made  for  the  comforta 
ble  support  of  the  infirm  and  aged,  and  for  the  instruction  of  the 
young  in  reading,  writing,  and  arithmetic,  and  in  some  art  or 
trade,  by  which  they  might  acquire  the  means  of  support. 

"  Col.  Smith,  an  old  revolutionary  officer,  of  Sussex  county, 
Va.  ordered  in  his  will,  that  all  his  slaves,  seventy  or  eighty  in 
number,  should  be  emancipated  ;  and  bequeathed  above  $5000 
to  defray  the  expense  of  transporting  them  to  Liberia. 

"  Patsey  Morris,  of  Louisa  co.,  Va.  directed  by  will,  that  all 
her  slaves,  sixteen  in  number,  should  be  emancipated,  and  left 
$500  to  fit  them  out,  and  defray  the  expense  of  their  passage. 

"  The  schooner  Randolph,  which  sailed  from  Georgetown, 
South  Carolina,  had  on  board  twenty-six  slaves,  liberated  by  a 
benevolent  individual  near  Cheraw. 

*  Matthew  Carey,  Esq.  of  Philadelphia. 


44  LETTERS  TO  THE 

"  Of  105  emigrants,  who  sailed  in  the  brig  Doris,  from  Balti 
more  and  Norfolk,  sixty-two  were  emancipated  on  condition  of 
being  conveyed  to  Liberia. 

"  Sampson  David,  late  a  member  of  the  legislature  of  Ten 
nessee,  provided  by  will,  that  all  his  slaves,  twenty-two  in  num 
ber,  who  are  mostly  young,  should  be  liberated  in  1840,  or 
sooner,  at  his  wife's  decease,  if  she  died  before  that  period. 

"  Herbert  B.  Elder,  of  Petersburg,  Va.  bequeathed  their 
freedom  to  all  his  slaves,  twenty  in  number,  with  directions 
that  they  should  be  conveyed  to  Liberia,  by  the  first  opportu 
nity. 

"  A  gentleman  in  Georgia,  has  recently  left  forty-nine  slaves 
free,  on  condition  of  their  removal  to  Liberia. 

"Mrs.  Elizabeth  Morris,  of  Bourbon  co.,  Va.  provided  by- 
will  for  the  emancipation  of  her  slaves,  about  forty  in  number. 

"David  Patterson,  of  Orange  co.,  North  Carolina,  freed 
eleven  slaves,  to  be  sent  to  Liberia. 

"Rev.  Fletcher  Andrew,  gave  freedom  to  twenty,  who  con 
stituted  most  of  his  property,  for  the  same  purpose. 

"  Nathaniel  Crenshaw,  near  Richmond,  liberated  sixty  slaves, 
with  a  view  to  have  them  sent  to  Liberia. 

"  Rev.  Robert  Cox,  Suffolk  co.,  Va.  provided  by  his  will  for 
the  emancipation  of  all  his  slaves,  upwards  of  thirty,  and  left 
several  hundred  dollars  to  pay  their  passage  to  Liberia. 

"Joseph  Leonard  Smith,  of  Frederick  co.,  Md.  liberated 
twelve  slaves,  who  sailed  from  Baltimore  for  Liberia. 

"  Of  107  coloured  persons  who  sailed  in  the  Carolinian,  from 
Norfolk  for  Liberia,  forty-Jive  were  emancipated  on  condition  of 
being  sent  there. 

"  In  the  brig  Criterion,  which  sailed  from  Norfolk  for  Liberia, 
on  the  2d  August,  1831,  there  were  forty-six  persons  who  had 
been  liberated,  on  condition  of  proceeding  to  Liberia ;  18  by 
Mrs.  Greenfield,  near  Natchez  ;  8  by  Mr.  Williams,  of  Eliza 
beth  city,  N.  C. ;  7  by  Gen.  Jacocks,  of  Perquimans,  Ohio  ;"  4 
by  Thomas  Davis,  Montgomery  co.  Miss. ;  2  by  two  other  in 
dividuals  ;  and  5  by  some  of  the  Quakers  in  North  Caroling 
Of  those  liberated  slaves,  2  only  were  above  40  years  of  age, 
22  were  under  35,  and  22  under  20. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  45 

"  A  gentleman  in  N.  C.}  last  year,  gave  freedom  to  all  his 
slaves,  14  in  number,  and  provided  20  dollars  each,  to  pay  their 
passage  to  Liberia. 

"  Mrs.  J.  of  Mercer  co.,  Kentucky,  and  her  two  sons,  one  a 
clergyman,  and  the  other  a  physician,  lately  offered  the  Coloni 
zation  Society,  sixty  slaves,  to  be  conveyed  to  Liberia. 

"  Henry  Robertson,  of  Hampton,  Va.,  bequeathed  their  free 
dom  to  seven  slaves,  and  fifty  dollars  to  each,  to  aid  in  their  re 
moval  to  Liberia. 

"  William  Fletcher,  of  Perquimans,  N.  C.,  ordered  by  will, 
that  his  slaves,  twelve  in  number,  should  be  hired  out  for  a  year 
after  his  death,  to  earn  wherewith  to  pay  for  their  conveyance 
to  Liberia. 

"A  gentleman  in  Kentucky,  lately  wrote  to  the  secretary  of 
the  society,  c  I  will  willingly  give  up  twelve  or  fifteen  of  my 
coloured  people  at  this  time ;  and  so  on  gradually ',  till  the  whole, 
about  sixty,  are  given  up,  if  means  for  their  passage  can  be  af 
forded.' 

"  On  board  the  Harriet,  from  Norfolk,  of  one  hundred  and  sixty 
emigrants,  between/or^  and  fifty  had  been  slaves,  emancipated 
on  condition  of  being  sent  to  Africa. 

"  In  addition  to  these  instances,  several  others  might  be  added, 
particularly  that  of  Richard  Bibb,  Esq.,  of  Kentucky,  who  pro 
poses  to  send  sixty  slaves  to  Liberia — two  gentlemen  in  Mis 
souri,  who  desire  to  send  eleven  slaves — a  lady  in  Kentucky  of 
fers  forty — the  Rev.  John  C.  Burress,  of  Alabama,  intends  pre 
paring  all  his  slaves  for  colonization — the  Rev.  William  L. 
Breckenridge,  of  Kentucky,  manumitted  11  slaves,  who  sailed 
a  few  weeks  ago  from  New-Orleans. 

"  In  this  work  of  benevolence,  the  Society  of  Friends,  as  in  so 
many  other  cases,  have  nobly  distinguished  themselves,  and  as 
sumed  a  prominent  attitude.  They  have,  in  North  Carolina, 
liberated  no  less  than  652  slaves,  whom  they  had  under  their 
care,  besides,  as  says  my  authority,  an  unknown  number  of  chil 
dren,  husbands  and  wives,  connected  with  them  by  consanguin 
ity,  and  of  whom,  part  went  to  Canada,  part  to  Liberia,  part  to 
Hayti,  and  a  portion  to  Ohio.  In  the  performance  of  these  acts 
of  benevolence,  they  expended  $12,759.  They  had  remaining 


46  LETTERS  TO  THE 

under  their  care,  in  December,  1830, 402  slaves,  for  whom  similar 
arrangements  were  to  be  made. 

It  holds  out  every  encouragement  to  the  Colonization  Socie 
ty,  that  the  applications  for  the  transportation  of  free  negroes, 
and  slaves  proposed  to  be  emancipated  on  condition  of  removal 
to  Liberia,  far  exceed  its  means.  There  are,  in  North  Carolina 
and  the  adjacent  states,  from  three  to  four  thousandofboih  de 
scriptions,  ready  to  embark,  were  the  society  in  a  situation  to 
send  them  away." 

The  foregoing  authentic  facts,  are  here  presented  in  refuta 
tion  of  all  you  have  said  in  denial  of  the  moral  influence  of  co 
lonization  in  effecting  abolition  and  not  merely  promoting  it.  I 
forbear  to  add  a  single  word  of  comment. 

I  pass  briefly  to  notice  the  statistical  calculations  you  make 
on  page  74,  in  order  to  show  that  the  scheme  of  transporting  to 
Africa  "  the  whole  coloured  population,"  is  altogether  imprac 
ticable.  But  here  again  you  bewilder  yourself  and  mislead 
your  readers,  by  another  of  your  "  day  dreams."  On  what  au 
thority  do  you  assert  that  the  object  of  the  society  is  "to  abol 
ish  slavery,  by  transporting  all  the  free,  or  all  the  slaves,  or  all 
the  annual  increase  ?"  Have  you  not  reprobated  the  society 
because  of  its  "  single  and  exclusive  object,"  and  now  you  add 
another  to  the  many  objects  you  impute  to  it,  some  of  which 
the  society  never  dreamed  of.  I  again  remind  you,  sir,  thai  the 
wily  object  of  the  American  Colonization  Society  is  to  colonize, 
that  it  will  only  colonize  the  free,  and  that  it  will  only  colonize 
these  with  their  own  consent.  And  if  among  the  millions  of 
slaves  there  shall  only  3000  become  free,  and  if  among  the  free, 
there  should  only  3000  more  consent  to  be  colonized,  then  the 
extent  of  the  colonization  scheme  will  terminate  with  the  trans 
portation  of  6000.  If  you  then,  can  by  your  figures,  tell  how 
many  of  the  free,  or  of  those  who  shall  become  such,  will  con 
sent  to  go  to  Africa  between  this  time  and  the  year  1860,  ihe 
time  which  your  calculations  contemplate,  you  can  readily  sat 
isfy  yourself,  that  the  society  is  guiltless  of  the  "  stupendous 
absurdity"  of  which  you  are  the  exclusive  proprietor,  and  have 
earned  the  exclusive  honour.  You  might  have  spared  yourself 
then  this  Quixotic  war  upon  a  windmill  of  your  own  inven 
tion. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  47 

But  you  next  "  assert,"  in  the  style  of  dogmatizing,  which 
I  must  suppose  to  be  a  recent  accomplishment,  acquired  along 
with  your  anti-slavery  creed,  "  that  there  is  a  general  dispo 
sition  among  slaveholders  to  perpetuate  slavery  !"  I  am  sorry, 
sir,  that  you  do  not  feel  the  importance  of  some  degree  of  accu 
racy  in  your  assertions,  and  the  propriety  of  sustaining  your 
ipse  dixit  with  some  kind  of  evidence,  especially  when  you 
contradict  men  whose  intelligence,  character,  and  opportunity  of 
understanding  the  subject,  are  fully  equal  to  your  own. 

Let  me  refer  you  to  the  speech  of  R.  S.  Finlay,  Esq.  at  a  late 
anniversary.  He  says, 

"  I  know  that  much  pains  have  been  taken  to  calumniate  our 
brethren  of  the  south,  by  representing  them  to  be  the  advocates 
of  perpetual  despotism.  From  an  extensive  and  familiar  ac 
quaintance  with  their  views  and  sentiments,  formed  upon  actual 
observation,  I  know  this  not  to  be  the  fact.  I  have  publicly 
discussed  this  subject  every  where  in  the  southern  states, 
from  the  eastern  shore  of  Maryland  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  in 
the  presence  of  hundreds  of  slaves  at  a  time,  and  with  the  ge 
neral  approbation  of  the  audience  to  which  my  addresses  were 
delivered, — and  have  uniformly  represented  it  as  affording  the 
best  and  only  safe  means  of  gradually  and  entirely  abolishing 
slavery.  Indeed,  so  well  is  the  moral  influence  of  the  opera 
tions  of  this  society  understood  in  the  extreme  south,  that  all 
the  advocates  of  perpetual  slavery  are  bitterly  opposed  to  it,  and 
none  are  its  advocates,  but  the  friends  of  gradual,  peaceful,  and 
ultimate  entire  emancipation  /"  16th  Report. 

With  such  unequivocal  testimony  before  you,  how  great  must 
be  the  prejudice  under  which  you  "  assert  that  there  is  a  gene 
ral  disposition  among  slaveholders  to  perpetuate  slavery."  And 
how  differently  did  a  knowledge  of  the  facts,  which  the  history 
of  the  society  furnishes,  influence  the  venerable  and  immortal 
CLAHKSON,  who  has  devoted  half  a  century  to  the  cause  of  Afri 
can  emancipation.  In  a  letter,  dated  Nov.  4,  1831,  Mr.  Clark- 
son  says, 

"  For  myself,  I  freely  confess,  that  of  all  the  things  which 
have  occurred  in  our  favour  since  the  year  1787,  when  the  abo 
lition  of  the  slave  trade  was  first  seriously  proposed,  that  which 
is  now  going  on  in  the  United  States,  under  the  auspices  of  the 


48  LETTERS  TO  THE 

American  Colonization  Society,  is  most  important.  It  sur 
passes  any  thing  which  has  yet  occurred.  No  sooner  had  the 
colony  been  founded  at  Cape  Montserado,  than  there  appeared 
a  disposition  among  the  owners  of  slaves  in  the  United  States 
to  give  them  freedom  voluntarily,  without  one  farthing  of  com 
pensation,  and  to  allow  them  to  be  sent  to  the  land  of  their  an 
cestors.  This  is  to  me  truly  astonishing  !  a  total  change  of 
heart  in  the  planters,  so  that  many  thousands  of  slaves  may  be 
redeemed  without  any  cost  of  their  redemption  !  Can  this  al 
most  universal  feeling  have  taken  place  without  the  interven 
tion  of  the  Spirit  of  God  !"  And  Wilberforce,  that  champion 
of  freedom,  in  allusion  to  the  same  subject,  and  this  at  the  time 
of  his  high  health  and  intellectual  vigour,  confessed  that  "  warm 
as  his  anticipations  had  been,  they  were  but  cold  and  meagre, 
compared  with  the  reality,  effected  by  this  noble  plan."  Such 
were  the  voluntary  tributes,  paid  to  this  society  for  developing 
the  disposition  existing  among  slaveholders,  to  emancipate  their 
slaves,  and  from  Bj^itish  philanthropists  too.  I  blush,  while  I 
exhibit  them,  sir,  in  contrast  with  your  'c  assertion  y"  while 
constrained  to  confess  that  you  are  an  American,  declaring  in 
the  face  of  irrefragable  facts,  that  your  own  countrymen  and  fel 
low  Christians  are  "  endeavouring  to  transmit  slavery,  as  a 
precious  inheritance  to  their  latest  posterity,"  and  that  "  no  de 
sire  exists  at  the  south  to  get  rid  of  slavery." 

I  am  pained  at  the  necessity  imposed  upon  me  by  duty  to  the 
cause  of  truth,  to  meet  this  last  statement  by  a  palpable  denial, 
and  the  presentation  of  a  single  evidence  which  ought  to  cover 
you  witli  shame  for  having  done  so  great  an  act  of  injustice.  I 
refer  to  the  illustrious  example  of  Maryland  in  her  noble  effort 
to  add  another  to  the  non-slaveholding  states  of  this  union. 
The  managers  of  that  society  avow  "the  extirpation  of  slave 
ry  as  the  chief  object  of  its  existence,"  and  one  "  worthy  of 
every  exertion ;"  and  again,  "It  is  the  DESIRE  of  the  society  tfcat 
the  evil  of  slavery  should  be  removed  from  Maryland."  But 
in  direct  contradiction  to  this  official  document,  and  with  this  sen 
tence  before  you,  as  your  quotations  prove,  could  it  have  been 
believed  that  you,  sir,  would  "  assert"  that  "  no  desire  exists 
;at  the  south  to  get  rid  of  slavery."  Which  are  we  to  believe  in 
such  a  case  ?  Your  own  unsupported  assertion,  or  the  follow 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  49 

ing  preamble  to  their  constitution,  "  Whereas,  it  is  the  DESIRE 
of  the  Maryland  State  Colonization  Society,  to  hasten  as  far 
as  they  can  the  period  when  slavery  shall  cease  to  exist 
in  Maryland,"  &c.  I  mean  no  disrespect  when  I  say,  that  every 
reader  will  decide  that  you  have  here  most  grievously  misrepre 
sented  the  character  of  your  fellow  citizens  of  the  south,  and  I 
forbear  pursuing  any  farther  the  caricature  you  have  drawn  of 
this  Maryland  State  Colonization  Society,  though  throughout  it 
is  made  up  of  a  perversion  and  distortion  of  the  facts  in  the 
case,  for  which  I  can  frame  no  apology.  You  call  it  a  "  dis 
graceful  contrivance  to  get  rid  of  the  free  blacks,  disguised  by 
insincere  professions  /"  "  A  cruel  and  perfidious  measure." 
From  a  personal  knowledge  of  the  managers  of  that  state  soci 
ety,  whom  you  thus  vilify,  the  most  of  whom  are  distinguished 
in  the  learned  professions,  and  also  eminent  in  their  Christian 
character,  I  feel  a  righteous  indignation  at  the  hardihood  which 
could  permit  you  to  accuse  them  of  "  disgraceful  hypocrisy, 
cruelty,  and  perfidy"  Where  they  are  known,  sir,  you  will 
allow  me  to  say,  without  any  depreciation  of  your  station  or 
character,  even  Mr.  Jay  will  fail  in  staining  their  character,  or 
impeaching  their  integrity. 

I  would  here  introduce  to  your  notice  a  few  brief  extracts, 
from  the  writings  and  speeches  of  distinguished  gentlemen  in 
various  parts  of  the  south  and  west,  all  of  whom  are,  or  have 
been,  extensive  slaveholders,  and  I  would  offer  these  in  refuta 
tion  of  this  cruel  and  unjust  description  you  give  of  the  south 
ern  character,  when  you  say,  that  "  No  desire  exists  at  the  south 
to  get  rid  of  slavery  /"  and  again,  "  So  far  from  slaveholders 
wishing  to  abolish  slavery,  they  are  endeavouring  to  transmit 
it  as  a  precious  inheritance  to  their  latest  posterity  /"  and 
"  we  assert  that  there  is  a  GENERAL  disposition  among  slave 
holders  to  perpetuate  slavery  /"  These  are  your  assertions, 
made  with  the  expressed  design  to  convict  the  Colonization  So 
ciety  of  misrepresentation  and  falsehood,  in  expressing  their 
confidence  that  "  there  is  a  growing  desire  at  the  south  to 
abolish  slavery,"  and  that  very  many  slaveholders  are  ready  to 
emancipate  their  slaves,  so  soon  as  the  society  provides  the 
means  for  their  emigration.  The  following  brief  extracts  will 
amply  refute  your  statements,  and  sustain  those  of  the  Coloni- 
6 


50  LETTERS  TO  THB 

zation  Society.    You  will  not  question  that  the  speakers  are  as 
respectable  and  credible  as  yourself. 

Patrick  Henry. 

"  I  repeat  it  again,  that  it  would  rejoice  my  very  soul  that 
every  one  of  my  fellow  beings  was  emancipated.  As  we  ought 
with  gratitude  to  admire  that  decree  of  heaven  which  has  num 
bered  us  among  the  free,  we  ought  to  lament  and  deplore  the 
necessity  of  holding  our  fellow  men  in  bondage." — Debates  in 
Virginia  Convention. 

Zachariah  Johnson. 

"  Slavery  has  been  the  foundation  of  that  impiety  and  dissi 
pation  which  have  been  so  much  disseminated  among  our  coun 
trymen.  If  it  were  totally  abolished,  it  would  do  much  good." 
Ibid. 

Judge  Tucker. 

"  The  introduction  of  slavery  into  this  country,  is,  at  this 
day,*  considered  among  its  greatest  misfortunes."  And  in 
1803,  he  said,  after  pronouncing  slavery  to  be  "  a  calamity,  a  re 
proach,  and  a  curse," — "  those  who  wish  to  postpone  emancipa 
tion,  do  not  reflect  that  every  day  renders  the  task  more  arduous 
to  be  performed." 

General  Harper. 

'It  tends,  and  may  powerfully  tend,  to  rid  us  gradually  and 
entirely  in  the  United  States,  of  slaves  and  slavery,  a  great 
moral  and  political  evil,  of  increasing  virulence  and  extent, 
from  which  much  mischief  is  now  felt,  and  very  great  calamity 
in  future,  is  justly  apprehended.  It  speaks  not  only  to  our  un 
derstandings,  but  to  our  senses ;  and  however  it  may  be  derided 
by  some,  or  overlooked  by  others,  who  have  not  the  ability  or 
time,  or  do  not  give  themselves  the  trouble  to  reflect  on, 
and  estimate  properly,  the  force  and  extent  of  those  great 
moral  and  physical  causes,  which  prepare  gradually,  and  at 
length  bring  forth  the  most  terrible  convulsions  in  civil  society  ; 
it  will  not  be  viewed  without  deep  and  awful  apprehensions  "by 
any  who  shall  bring  sound  minds,  and  some  share  of  political 
knowledge  and  sagacity,  to  the  serious  consideration  of  the  sub 
ject.  Such  persons  will  give  their  most  serious  attention  to 

*  This  was  said  as  early  as  1795. 


HON.    WILLIAM  JAY.  51 

any  proposition  whicn  has  for  its  object,  the  eradication  of  this 
terrible  mischief  lurking  in  our  vitals." — Letter  on  Coloniza 
tion  Society. 

Darby. 

li  Copying  from  Montesquieu,  and  not  from  observation  of  na 
ture,  climate  has  been  called  upon  to  account  for  stains  on  the 
Ijuman  character,  imprinted  by  the  hand  of  political  mistake. 
No  country  where  negro  slavery  is  established,  but  must  bear, 
in  part,  the  wounds  inflicted  on  nature  and  justice.  Without 
pursuing  a  train  of  metaphysical  reasoning,  we  may  at  once 
draw  this  induction,  that  if  slavery,  like  pain,  is  one  of  the  laws 
of  existence,  the  latter  does  not  more  certainly  produce  physical 
weakness,  debility,  and  death,  than  does  the  former  lessen  the 
purity  of  virtue  in  the  human  breast.'" — History  of  Louisiana. 
MCall. 

"  It  is  shocking  to  human  nature,  that  any  race  of  mankind, 
and  their  posterity,  should  be  sentenced  to  perpetual  slavery." 
History  of  Georgia. 

General  Mercer. 

"  For,  although  it  is  believed,  and  is,  indeed,  too  obvious  to 
require  proof,  that  the  colonization  of  the  free  people  of  colour 
alone,  would  not  only  tend  to  civilize  Africa ;  to  abolish  the 
slave-trade  ;  and  greatly  to  advance  their  own  happiness ;  but  to 
promote  that  also  of  the  other  classes  of  society,  the  proprietors 
and  slaves ;  yet  the  hope  of  the  gradual  and  utter  abolition  of 
slavery,  in  a  manner  consistent  with  the  rights,  interests,  and 
happiness  of  society,  ought  never  to  be  abandoned." — Report  to 
Colonization  Society. 

F.  S.  Key,  Esq. 

"  I  hope  I  may  be  excused,  if  I  add,  that  the  subject  which 
engages  us,  is  one  in  which  it  is  our  right  to  act — as  much  our 
right  to  act,  as  it  is  the  right  of  those  who  differ  from  us  not  to 
act.  If  we  believe  in  the  existence  of  a  great  moral  and  po 
litical  evil  amongst  us,  and  that  duty,  honour,  and  interest,  call 
upon  us  to  prepare  the  way  for  its  removal,  we  must  act.  All 
that  can  be  required  of  us,  is,  that  we  act  discreetly,"  &c. 
Speech  before  Colonization  Society. 
Mr.  Clay. 

"  If  they  would  repress  all  tendencies  towards  liberty  and  ul- 


52  LETTERS  TO  THE 

timate  emancipation,  they  must  do  more  than  put  down  the 
benevolent  efforts  of  this  society.  They  must  penetrate  the 
human  soul,  and  eradicate  the  light  of  reason,  and  the  love  of 
iiberty.  Our  friends,  who  are  cursed  with  this  greatest  of  hu 
man  evils,  (slavery,)  deserve  our  kindest  attention  and  consi 
deration.  Their  property  and  safety  are  both  involved." — 
Speech  before  Colonization  Society. 

William  H.  Fitzhugh,  Esq. 

"  Slavery,  in  its  mildest  form,  is  an  evil  of  the  darkest  cha 
racter.  Cruel  and  unnatural  in  its  origin,  no  plea  can  be  urged 
in  justification  of  its  continuance,  but  the  plea  of  necessity ; 
not  that  necessity  which  arises  from  our  habits,  our  prejudices, 
or  our  wants ;  but  the  necessity  which  requires  us  to  submit  to 
existing  evils,  rather  than  substitute,  by  their  removal,  others  of 
a  more  serious  and  destructive  character.  There  k  no  riveted 
attachment  to  slavery,  prevailing  extensively,  in  any  portion  of 
our  country.  Its  injurious  effects  on  our  habits,  our  morals,  our 
individual  wealth,  and  more  especially  on  our  national  strength 
and  prosperity,  are  universally  felt,  and  almost  universally 
acknowledged." 

Mr.  Levasseur. 

'•  Happily,  there  is  no  part  of  the  civilized  world,  in  which  it 
is  necessary  to  discuss  the  justice  or  injustice  of  the  principle 
of  negro  slavery  ;  at  the  present  day,  every  sane  man  agrees 
that  it  is  a  monstrosity,  and  it  would  be  altogether  inaccurate, 
to  suppose  that  there  are  in  the  United  States,  more  than  else 
where,  individuals  sufficiently  senseless  to  seek  to  defend  it, 
either  by  their  writings  or  conversation.  For  myself,  who  have 
traversed  the  twenty-four  states  of  the  union,  and  in  the  course 
of  a  year  have  had  more  than  one  opportunity  of  hearing  long 
and  keen  discussions  upon  this  subject,  I  declare  that  I  never 
have  found  but  a  single  person,  who  seriously  defended  this 
principle.  This  was  a  young  man,  whose  head,  sufficiently 
imperfect  in  its  organization,  was  filled  with  confused  ami 
ridiculous  notions  relative  to  Roman  History ;  and  appeared  to 
be  completely  ignorant  of  the  history  of  his  own  country.  Il 
would  be  waste  of  time,  to  repeat  here,  his  crude  and  ignorant 
tirade." 

Now,  sir,  if  the  sentiments  of  these  men  of  eminent  talents, 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  53. 

citizens  of  the  south,  and  slaveholders,  do  not  convict  you  of 
having  caricatured  and  calumniated  the  southern  character, 
surely  you  will  retract  this  act  of  cruelty  and  injustice,  when 
you  read  the  following  extracts  from  "the  Southern  Review," 
which  is  the  acknowledged  representative  of  the  slaveholding 
region,  and  expresses  itself  thus  while  vindicating  the  present 
necessity  of  the  system,  though  deprecating  its  perpetuity. 

"  The  conscientious  slaveholder  deserves  a  larger  share  of 
the  sympathy  of  those  who  have  sympathy  to  spare,  than  any 
other  class  of  men,  not  excepting  the  slave  himself."  "  One 
great  evil  of  the  system  is  its  tendency  to  produce  disorder 
and  poverty  in  a  country."  "  The  slave-trade  may  be  regarded 
as  a  conspiracy  of  all  Europe  and  the  commercial  part  of  this 
continent,  not  only  against  Africa,  but  in  a  more  aggravated 
sense,  against  these  southern  regions." 

But  if  all  this  were  insufficient,  let  me  add  the  testimony  of 
that  same  Mr.  Harrison,  of  Virginia,  whose  language  you  have 
so  perverted,  and  "  vilified,"  in  another  part  of  your  book.  He 
says,  speaking  from  personal  knowledge,  to  which  you  cannot 
pretend, 

"  Almost  all  masters,  in  Virginia,  assent  to  the  proposition, 
that  when  slaves  can  be  liberated  without  danger  to  them 
selves,  and  to  their  own  advantage,  it  ought  to  be  done.  If 
there  are  few  who  think  otherwise  in  Virginia,  I  feel  assured 
that  there  are  few  such  any  where  in  the  south!" 

Surely  you  cannot  suppose  that  such  vituperation  and  censor 
riousness  as  you  have  here  indulged,  against  this  Maryland 
scheme,  and  the  entire  south,  can  produce  conviction  in  any 
mind,  or  commend  your  "  inquiry"  to  the  candid  and  intelligent. 
Nor  can  you  so  far  deceive  yourself  as  to  suppose  that  "  this  is 
the  style  to  do  good  with."  It  is  plain  that  your  zeal  in  behalf 
of  anti-colonizationism  has  "  eaten  you  up,"  and  reason,  con 
science,  and  religion  itself,  are  all  powerless  in  restraining 
your  wrath. 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c< 


54  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  IX. 

SIR, 

HAVING  deceived  yourself  into  the  belief  that  the  Coloniza 
tion  Society  is  impotent,  and  the  scheme  is  impracticable, 
you  next  call  on  "  the  friends  of  humanity  and  religion  to  meet  it 
with  unrelenting  hostility,  to  labour  without  rest  and  without 
weariness  for  its  entire  prostration."  When  you  began  your 
book  you  called  it  a  "powerful  institution,"  and  now  you  pro 
claim  its  "  utter  impotency,"  which  you  explain  by  saying  it  is 
"powerless  for  good,  but  mighty  for  evil"  And  having  set  th* 
example  of  "  unrelenting  hostility,"  you  invoke  "  humanity 
and  religion,"  and  the  friends  of  both,  to  enlist  under  your  ban 
ner,  on  which  is  inscribed, 

"  The  extinction  of  the  American  Colonization  Society,  the 
first  step  to  the  abolition  of  slavery  !" 

Here,  then,  is  the  attitude  you  assume,  and  rally  the  forces  of 
c:  immediate  abolitionism"  by  this  war-cry.  Be  it  so.  Let  it  be 
distinctly  understood  that  "we  are  not  the  attacking  party  ; — 
the  American  Colonization  Society  does  not  make  war  upon  any 
man  or  any  association  of  men.  With  the  American  Anti-Slavery 
Society  we  have  nothing  to  do,  further  than  in  self-defence  ;  and 
meanwhile  we  rejoice,  and  will  rejoice,  in  contemplating  any 
measure  of  good  which  may  be  effected  by  all  other  societies, 
for  the  African  race." 

In  the  recapitulation  of  the  allegations' against  the  society, 
which  you  introduce  into  this  long  chapter,  you  repeat  that  it . 
"professes  to  be  a  remedy  for  slavery,  and  the  only  one,"  a 
charge  which  I  have  shown  in  a  former  letter  to  be  without  any 
foundation  in  truth.  And  you  exhibit  your  own  melancholy  in 
consistency,  by  attempting  to  convict  the  society's  publications 
of  contradictions,  in  having  insisted  that  the  object  of  the  so 
ciety  is  not  emancipation,  while  its  moral  influence  in  promo- 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  55 

ting  that  cause,  is  so  often  referred  to,  thus  refusing  to  acknow 
ledge  the  obvious  distinction  between  the  single  and  exclusive 
object  of  the  society,  and  those  collateral  benefits  which  its 
friends  expect  from  its  success.  Such  disingenuousness  and 
uncandid  fault-finding  I  have  had  frequent  occasion  to  rebuke, 
in  previous  parts  of  this  correspondence,  and  shall  not  dwell  on 
it  here. 

The  following  is,  however,  a  distinct  retraction  of  most  of 
the  charges  I  have  refuted,  and  presents  your  opposition  in 
another  form. 

"  We  fully  admit  that  the  society  has  no  more  right  to  med 
dle  with  emancipation  or  slavery,  than  a  Bible  society ; — 
and  we  condemn  it,  because  disregarding  its  professed  object, 
and  in  utter  contempt  of  its  own  constitution,  it  has  lent  itself 
to  support  and  perpetuate  a  system  of  cruelty  and  wickedness." 
"  We  will  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  society  has  stepped  out 
of  its  sphere  to  acknowledge  that  man  may  have  property  in 
man,  to  justify  him  for  holding  this  property,  and  to  vilify  all 
who  would  persuade  him  instantly  to  surrender  it." 

There  are  here  three  distinct  and  explicit  accusations,  each  of 
which  is  denied.  I  will  now  consider  them  separately  : 

1st.  The  society  "  acknowledges  that  man  may  have  pro 
perty  in  man." 

This  you  attempt  to  sustain  by  quotations  from  the  African 
Repository,  in  which  the  "rights  of  the  slaveholders  are  re 
spected  as  sacred."  Now  any  schoolboy  (pardon  the  allusion) 
will  perceive  that  the  rights  here  acknowledged  as  sacred,  are  the 
legal  rights  of  the  slaveholder,  and  not  the  abstract  rights,  for 
which  some  contend.  Hence,  the  respect  is  shown  to  the  "  law 
of  the  land,"  and  does  not  imply,  as  is  falsely  insinuated,  the 
justification  of  those  laws.  So  far  from  this,  the  society  thus 
expresses  itself,  in  the  face  of  heaven  and  earth,  "  That  slavery 
is  a  moral  and  political  evil,  is  a  truth  inscribed,  as  it  were, 
upon  the  firmament  of  heaven,  the  face  of  the  earth,  and  the 
heart  of  man  ; — the  denial  of  which  would  be  the  denial  of  the 
fundamental  principle  of  all  free  governments." 

2d,  You  next  accuse  the  society  of  "  excusing  and  justify 
ing  slaveholders,"  This  charge  comes  with  a  singular  grace, 


56  LETTERS    TO    THE 

from  one  who  blames  the  society  for  "professing  to  be  a  re 
medy  for  slavery,  and  being  about  to  abolish  it,"  and  especially 
in  the  face  of  the  fact,  that  those  in  the  south  who  do  "  excuse 
and  justify"  the  system,  regard  it  as  a  "  northern  device  to 
wrest  from  them  their  slaves."  But  could  you,  sir,  expect  that 
the  sanction  of  your  name  would  establish  this  allegation, 
coupled  as  it  is  with  a  form  of  prayer  to  be  used  by  the  head  oi 
a  family,  in  the  slave  region,  published  by  the  excellent  Bishop 
Meade,  himself  a  zealous  colonizationist  ? 

"  O  heavenly  Master,  hear  me  while  I  lift  up  my  heart  in 
prayer,  for  those  unfortunate  beings  who  call  me  master.  O 
God  make  known  to  me  my  whole  duty  towards  them  and  their 
oppressed  race,  and  give  me  courage  and  zeal  to  do  it  at  all 
events.  Convince  me  of  sin,  if  I  be  wrong  in  retaining  them 
another  moment  in  bondage." 

Is  there  any  thing  here  like  excusing  or  justifying  slavehold- 
ing.  And  if  Bishop  Meade,  himself  a  zealous  colonizationist, 
recommends  this  prayer  to  the  pious  colonizationists  who  are 
slaveholders  in  the  south,  arid  who  daily  use  this  "  manual  of 
devotion,"  how  then  do  you  say  that  "  conscience  and  the  word 
of  God,  death,  judgment,  and  eternity,  enter  not  into  the  com 
position  of  colonization,"  and  that  the  society  "  disclaims  all  ap 
peals  to  the  conscience,"  p.  73. 

3d.  But  you  affirm,  lastly,  that  "  the  society  vilifies  all  wjio 
would  persuade  the  slaveholder  instantly  to  emancipate."  I  shall 
not  examine  the  evidence  you  bring  to  bolster  up  this  assertion, 
in  detail,  in  this  letter,  but  would  here  only  record  my  unqualified 
denial  even  of  its  semblance  of  truth.  The  society  vilifies 
nobody,  nor  do  you  furnish  a  particle  of  testimony  in  proof  of 
any  vilification,  though  your  own  book  "  vilifies"  that  society  in 
the  worst  sense  of  that  term,  as  I  have  already  shown.  But  the 
opinions  expressed  by  the  society  and  its  friends,  against  anti- 
slavery  societies,  every  reader  will  perceive  is  in  no  instance 
against  "persuading  slaveholders  to  emancipate,"  as  you  most 
unjustly  allege.  And  though  the  society  cannot  as  such  inter 
fere  with  the  subject  of  slavery,  because  of  its  single  and  ex> 
elusive  object,  yet  tens  of  thousands  of  its  members,  including 
very  many  slaveholders,  would  unite  with  those  who  would 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  57 

"persuade  masters  to  emancipate;"  and  IF  this  were  the  pro 
fession  and  practice  of  the  anti-slavery  societies,  the  Coloniza 
tion  Society  would  rejoice  to  welcome  them  as  auxiliaries  in 
their  benevolent  designs,  and  its  members  would  every  where 
exclaim,  "  Let  there  be  no  strife  I  pray  thee,  between  me 
and  thee,  between  my  herdsmen  and  thy  herdsmen,  for  we  be 
brethren." 

It  is  not  true,  then,  that  the  society  vilifies  those  who  would 
persuade  slaveholders  to  emancipate,  though  it  is  conceded,  that 
similar  unkind  and  unfounded  attacks,  to  that  which  you  have 
made,  have  led  some  of  its  friends  to  "  err  from  their  propriety," 
and  may  have  led  the  society,  in  its  own  vindication,  sometimes 
in  language,  to  violate  its  strict  neutrality.  For,  in  the  language 
of  Gerrit  Smith,  the  able  advocate  of  emancipation,  and  the  true 
friend  of  the  Colonization  Society,  "  Such  is,  or  should  be  the 
neutrality  of  our  society,  that  its  members  may  be  free  on  the 
one  hand  to  be  slaveholders,  and  on  the  other  to  join  the  Anti- 
Slavery  Society,  without  doing  violence  to  their  connexion  with 
the  Colonization  Society."  For  there  are  thousands  of  us,  and 
God  is  my  record,  I  am  one  of  them,  who  "joined  the  Coloni 
zation  Society  in  the  spirit,  and  with  the  objects  of  abolitionists. 
In  that  spirit,  and  with  these  objects,  we.  continue  our  connexion 
with  it." 

You  need  not  marvel  then,  sir,  if  men  who  have  some  share 
of  reputation  and  intelligence,  however  inferior  in  either  to 
yourself,  should,  when  assailed  with  misrepresentation,  ridicule, 
opprobrium,  and  abuse,  sometimes  write  and  speak  unadvised 
ly,  and  even  unguardedly,  in  temper  I  mean,  in  self-vindica 
tion.  A  conscientious  integrity  may  sustain  a  man  under  any 
measure  of  persecution  for  righteousness'  sake,  but  when  his 
motives  are  impugned,  his  principles  impeached,  his  opinions 
and  practice  perverted,  and  his  claims  to  Christianity  itself, 
denied,  it  is  a  duty  he  owes  to  the  cause  of  truth,  that  he  enter 
his  disclaimer,  record  his  protest,  and  prove  his  innocence.  To 
be  sure  he  should  do  this  as  a  Christian,  "  not  rendering  railing 
for  railing,  but  contrariwise  ;"  nevertheless,  he  is  not  responsible 
for  the  wounds  which  his  adversary  may  receive  from  his  own 
darts,  when  their  points  are  made  to  recoil  upon  himself. ! 


58  LETTERS  TO  THE 

And  here,  sir,  I  would  briefly  refer  to  the  proofs  you  present, 
with  your  assertion,  that  the  society  is  in.  fact  an 
Anti-Abolition  Society. 

The  extract  from  the  speech  of  a  Mr.  Harrison,  of  Virginia,  is 
that  on  which  your  chief  reliance  is  placed,  and  which,  as  I  shall 
show,  you  not  only  pervert,  but  of  which  you  make  an  illogical  and 
illegitimate  use.  Arid  first,  I  would  remind  you,  that  at  the  time 
that  speech  was  delivered,  it  was  in  vindication  of  the  society 
from  formidable  opposition,  originating  in  the  south,  among  the 
advocates  of  slavery,  then  more  numerous  than  now.  They 
had  sought  to  prejudice  the  friends  of  the  cause  against  the 
Colonization  Society,  by  denying  its  professed  neutrality  on  the 
subject  of  slavery,  and  attributing  a  secret  design  of  promoting 
abolition,  calling  it  a  "  northern  device  to  wrest  from  us  our 
slaves."  For  notwithstanding  the  constitutional  declaration  of 
our  single  and  exclusive  object,  yet  the  practical  moral  influ 
ence  of  the  society's  operations  had  thus  early  resulted  ig  so 
many  instances  of  voluntary  emancipation,  that  the  pro- 
slavery  party  had  become  alarmed.  It  was  in  this  state  of 
things,  that  Mr.  Harrison  disclaimed  alliance  with  "any  abo 
lition  society  in  America  or  elsewhere,"  and  added,  that  the 
society  was  "  ready,  when  there  is  need,  to  pass  a  censure  upon 
such  societies  in  America."  This  language,  which,  in  one  of 
your  rhetorical  flourishes,  you  call  an  "unblushing  outrage," 
was  intended  and  understood  at  the  time,  to  be  nothing  more 
than  the  strongest  possible  assurance,  that  the  charge  of  sinis 
ter  or  secret  designs  to  exert  any  direct  action  upon  slavery, — 
would  be  a  violation  of  our  professions,  and  was  utterly  false. 
It  was  saying  to  the  advocates  of  perpetual  slavery,  if  you 
continue  to  repeat  your  calumny,  until  "  there  is  need,"  we  shall 
not  barely  disclaim  our  alliance  with  abolition  societies  of  which 
you  accuse  us,  but  will,  by  a  public  act,  "pass  a  censure  upon 
such  societies,"  and  thus  brand  you  with  this  evidence  of  false 
hood.  Where  then,  sir,  is  that  charity  which  "  thinketh  no 
evil,"  and  which  "  puts  the  most  favourable  construction  even 
on  the  most  unfavourable  appearances,"  in  the  strange  p^r- 
version  of  this  sentiment  into  an  "  unblushing  outrage." 

But  the  use  you  make  of  it,  is   still  worse   than  its  per- 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  59 

version,  for  you  apply  the  proposed  censure  to  the  "aboli 
tion  societies,"  founded  by  the  influence  of  such  men  as 
Franklin,  and  your  distinguished  father,  and  other  illustrious 
citizens,  who  advocated  gradual  abolition.  And  it  is  against 
these  that  you  allege  that  the  society  was  ready  to  "  pass  a  cen 
sure."  But  is  not  this  obviously  a  wild  conceit  of  your  mor 
bid  imagination?  These  societies  had  existed  more  than 
forty  years  before,  and  more  than  thirty  years  when  the 
Colonization  Society  was  formed;  and  yet,  though  they  were 
worthy  of  all  praise,  in  doing  all  that  their  scheme  was  capa 
ble  of  effecting,  yet  the  "  scattered  and  feeble  rays  of  light,"  as 
you  admit,  had  scarcely  "begun  to  pierce  the  dense  cloud 
which  brooded  over  the  southern  country,"  and  hence  no  alarm 
or  resistance  was  felt  among  the  advocates  for  slavery,  nor  would 
their  plan  have  ever  roused  the  fears  of  the  pro-slavery  party. 
During  forty  years  their  scheme  of  gradual  abolition  had  not 
sensibly  affected  the  slaveholding  states,  but  in  1828,  the  Colo 
nization  Society  had  made  such  an  impression,  and  produced 
voluntary  abolition  in  so  many  instances,  that  fears  were  enter 
tained  that  this  new  scheme  of  gradualism  was  becoming  too 
much  like  iinmediatism,  and  now  the  friends  of  perpetual 
slavery,  began  to  tremble.  Now  the  abolition  societies,  before 
regarded  as  harmless  things,  became  an  object  of  dread,  and 
fears  were  expressed  that  they  might  be  made  powerful  en 
gines  in  the  hands  of  the  Colonization  Society,  to  do  what 
their  own  constitution  prohibited  them  from  doing  by  direct 
action.  And  hence  it  became  necessary,  in  the  opinion  of  Mr. 
Harrison,  to  disclaim  "  alliance"  with  them,  and  promise,  "  if 
need  be,  to  pass  a  censure  upon  them."  This  mode  of  conces 
sion,  is  often  the  most  powerful  form  of  rhetoric,  and  at  the 
time  was  not  without  its  effect  upon  the  pro-slavery  enemies  of 
colonization.  But  it  is  the  essence  of  absurdity  to  suppose  that 
he  had  any  unfriendly  design  or  tendency  upon  the  abolition 
societies  ;  for  at  that  time,  1828,  many  of  the  prominent  friends 
of  these  societies,  were  actively  enlisted  in  the  cause  of  colo 
nization,  a  circumstance  which  probably  first  awakened  the 
jealousy  of  southern  men,  which  Mr.  Harrison  thought  it  pro 
per  to  remove,  by  the  language  he  used. 

But  you  have  persuaded  yourself,  that  this  promised  censure^ 


60  LETTERS  TO  THE 

— ptomised  "  when  there  is  need,"  and  never  performed,  be 
cause  never  needed,  has  had  the  effect  of  "  withering  and 
shrinking"  the  "  abolition  societies  and  their  conventions  !" 
How  strange  the  infatuation  which  could  attribute  such  mighty 
results  to  such  an  inefficient  cause  !  Surely,  Mr.  Harrison  lit 
tle  thought  when  he  made  that  speech,  such  stupendous  conse 
quences  would  follow,  and  better  had  it  have  been  for  him  if 
you  had  never  enlightened  him  by  this  discovery,  for  in  such 
a  case  truly, 

"  Ignorance  were  bliss,  and  it  were  folly  to  oe  wise." 

Still,  however,  you  have  made  a  more  extraordinary  use  of  this 
speech  than  either  of  those  I  have  named,  for  you  not  only 
scandalously  deteriorate  the  character  of  the  old  abolition  so 
cieties  by  attempting  to  make  it  appear  that  the  new  anti- 
slavery  societies,  are  their  legitimate  successors,  but  even  call 
them  "  more  sturdy  associations."  Spirit  of  Franklin,  Jay, 
and  Benezet !  Look  on  this  picture  and  then  on  that !  Your 
language  is, 

"Within  the  last  two  years,  the  abolition  societies  have 
been  partially  succeeded  by  more  sturdy  associations,  named 
Anti-slavery  Societies,  which,  instead  of  quailing  beneath  the 
frowns  of  their  FOE  !  have  dared  to  grapple  with  him  in  mortal 
conflict,  and  to  stake  the  hopes  of  freedom  on  the  issue." 

In  the  name  of  the  abolition  societies  alluded  to,  sir,  I  pro 
test  against  their  incongruous  association  in  any  aspect  with  the 
anti-slavery  societies,  much  less  as  inferior  to  them ;  I  regard  it 
as  worse  than  "  amalgamation  of  colours."* 


*  Notwithstanding  Mr.  Jay  so  spiritedly  repels  the  charge  against 
modern  abolitionists,  of  desiring  amalgamation,  as  a  calumny,  and 
declares  that  "  he  must  be  deeply  imbued  with  fanaticism,  or  rather 
insanity,"  who  contends  for  the  "  reception  in  our  families,  and  a 
place  at  our  tables"  for  the  blacks  ;  yet  the  following  significant  hint, 
at  another  kind,  of  amalgamation,  is  given  by  himself,  on  his  28th 
page,  where  he  affirms  : — 

"It  is  not  very  reputable  to  our  republicanism  and  religion,  that 
there  should  be  any  necessity  for  seminaries  for  the  exclusive  use  &f 
such  of  our  fellow  countrymen  as  happen  to  have  darker  complexions 
than  our  own."  Let  me  recommend,  that  in  the  promised  second 
edition,  either  this  sentence  should  be  omitted,  or  the  disclaimer  al 
luded  to,  for  both  will  hardly  find  credit. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  61 

I  deny  that  the  former  ever  "  quailed"  before  any  "frowns," 
or  that  the  Colonization  Society  ever  was  their  "/oe."  And  as 
to  the  "  daring  to  mortal  conflict"  of  which  you  speak,  I  greatly 
rejoice  to  know  that  the  "  hopes  of  freedom"  are  not  in  the 
keeping  of  your  Anti-Slavery  Societies,  and  that  they  cannot 
therefore  "  stake  them  on  any  issue."  No,  sir,  the  "  hopes  of 
freedom"  will  be  consummated,  if  both  our  society  and  your 
"sturdy  associations"  were  annihilated  to-morrow ;  for  they 
who  oppose,  must  "gird  themselves  for  warfare  against  all  the 
friends  of  virtue  and  of  liberty,  of  man  and  of  God." 

Believe  me,  sir,  you  deceive  yourself  egregiously,  when  you 
suppose  that  the  freedom  and  "happiness  of  millions  depends 
on  your  efforts,"  or  those  of  what  you  are  pleased  to  call  your 
"haughty  adversary,"  the  Colonization  Society.  But  if  they 
did,  you  should  remember,  that  "  the  end  does  not  always  sanc 
tify  the  means." 

With  due  respect. 

Yours,  &c. 


LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  X, 

SIR, 

As  an  evidence  of  the  character  and  tendency  of  the  abolition 
societies,  to  which  so  frequent  reference  is  made,  and  in  proof 
also,  that  Col.  Wm.  L.  Stone  has,  for  a  great  many  years,  ex 
hibited  a  consistency  of  character,  which  ought  to  shield  him 
from  the  obloquy  and  reproach  you  have  so  profusely  poured 
upon  him  in  your  book,  I  would  remind  you  of  the  Anti-Slavery 
Convention,  held  at  Baltimore,  in  1826,  by  the  Abolition  Man 
umission  Societies,  and  the  prominent  part  Mr.  Stone  took  in 
the  proceedings  of  the  Convention.  The  following  preamble 
and  resolutions,  among  others,  which  that  calumniated  man 
then  proposed  for  the  adoption  of  that  body,  demonstrate  that 
he  felt  and  acted,  nine  years  ago,  as  an  abolitionist,  which  he 
still  continues  to  be  in  the  Colonization  Society. 

"  Whereas  it  is  represented  by  the  great  body  of  the  owners 
of  slaves,  that  slavery  is  a  grievous  evil,  and  its  continuance 
and  increase  fraught  with  many  appalling  dangers :— and 
whereas,  the  friends  of  emancipation  are  frequently  called  upon 
by  the  proprietors  of  slaves,  to  devise  some  adequate  means  to 
rid  the  country,  by  a  safe  and  gradual  process,  of  a  population 
whose  continuance  amongst  us  is  so  unnatural,  and  whose 
rapid  multiplication  is  so  alarming ; — and  whereas  many  of 
the  northern  states  have  assisted,  in  former  times,  to  entail  this 
curse  upon  the  land,  by  countenancing  slavery  themselves,  and 
allowing  their  citizens  to  participate  in  the  African  slave-trade  : 
and  whereas,  the  safety,  prosperity,  and  happiness,  of  any  one 
portion  of  these  United  States,  is  alike  dear  to  all  j — and 
whereas,  in  the  opinion  of  this  convention,  it  is  expedient  £pr 
the  nation  to  put  forth  its  strength  in  a  concentrated  effort,  to 
free  this  happy  country  from  so  great  a  calamity,  without  a 
forcible  interference  with  rights  of  property,  sanctioned  indi 
rectly,  at  least,  by  the  constitution,  therefore, 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  63 

"  Resolved,  That  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  be  request 
ed  to  commence  the  great  work  of  emancipation  by  immedi 
ately  abolishing  slavery,  within  THE  DISTRICT  OF  COLUMBIA, 
and  causing  the  persons  set  at  liberty  to  be  transported  to  Hayti, 
or  to  the  western  coast  of  Africa;  or  either,  which  they  may 
choose  for  a  residence. 

"  And  whereas,  in  the  opinion  of  this  convention,  as  a  gene 
ral  rule,  ignorance  and  vice  are  inseparable  companions,  and 
the  best  way  to  make  good  servants,  is  to  enlighten  their  un 
derstandings,  and  improve  their  hearts,  by  wholesome,  moral, 
and  religious  instruction;  and  whereas,  it  is  admitted  on  all 
hands,  that  sooner  or  later  the  work  of  emancipation  must  be 
undertaken,  and  prosecuted  to  its  completion  ;  Therefore,  in 
order  that  the  slaves  may  be  better  fitted  to  appreciate  and  enjoy 
the  blessings  of  freedom — 

"  Resolved,  That  it  be  recommended  by  this  convention  to 
the  legislatures  of  the  several  states,  where  personal  slavery 
exists,  to  repeal  all  laws  in  any  manner  prohibiting  the  moral 
and  religious  instruction  of  the  slaves. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  proprietors  of  slaves  in  the  United  States 
be  respectfully  requested  by  this  convention,  to  encourage,  by 
all  possible  means,  the  instruction  of  their  slaves  in  reading, 
and  the  rudiments  of  a  common  English  education,  together 
with  the  leading  doctrines  of  Christianity,  by  Sunday  Schools, 
and  such  other  means  as  may  be  within  their  power !" 

Such  were  the  sentiments  of  this  "  distinguished  coloniza- 
tionist,"  in  1826,  and  then  equally  distinguished  in  the  "Abo 
lition  Societies,"  for  there  was,  and  is,  no  uncongeniality,  as 
these  resolutions  prove  :  and  most  of  them  were  adopted  by  the 
convention,  composed  of  delegates,  from  many  of  the  states  of 
this  union,  appointed  by  the  Abolition  Societies.  This  will 
still  be  more  apparent  by  the  following  resolution,  which  was 
adopted  by  the  convention. 

"  Resolved,  That  this  convention  would  approve  of  an  ade 
quate  appropriation  of  the  public  revenue  of  the  United  States, 
for  the  voluntary  removal  of  such  slaves,  as  may  hereafter  be 
emancipated,  to  any  country,  which  they  may  select  for  their 
future  residence." 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  voice  of  the  assembled  wisdom,  and 


64  LETTERS   TO    THE 

philanthropy,  of  those  Manumission  and  Abolition  Societies,  of 
the  first  of  which,  your  venerable  father  was  the  president.  And 
let  me  ask  you,  sir,  how  you  could  persuade  yourself,  to  repre 
sent  the  present  Anti-slavery  Society,  as  a  kindred  institution, 
after  reading  the  foregoing  preamble,  and  the  several  resolu 
tions,  I  have  adduced  ;  much  less  insinuate,  as  you  do,  that  it 
is  a  successor  in  the  same  objects  ?  And  pray,  sir,  with  these 
"authentic  facts,"  known  to  you,  let  me  inquire,  with  what 
consistency,  or  semblance  of  truth,  do  you  affirm,  that  "the 
Colonization  Society  vindicates  the  cruel  laws,  which  are 
crushing  these  people  to  the  dust,"  and  present  a  "  unanimous, 
vigorous,  and  persevering  opposition,  to  present  manumission," 
and  that,  "NO  MEMBER  of  the  Colonization  Society  has,  hi 
therto,  been  rash  enough  to  make  the  attempt,  to  recommend  the 
free  blacks  to  the  sympathy  of  Christians,  to  propose  SCHOOLS 
for  their  instruction,  plans  for  encouraging  their  industry,  and 
efforts  for  their  moral  and  religious  improvement?"  I  i\ped 
not  tell  you,  that  Colonel  Stone  was  a  member  of  the  Coloni 
zation  Society,  in  1826,*  when,  in  a  convention  of  abolitionists, 
he  thus  "made  the  attempt,"  "proposed  schools,"  and  other 
"  efforts  for  the  moral  and  religious  improvement  of  these  peo 
ple,"  and  presented  a  powerful  appeal  against  those  "  cruel 
laws,"  which  you  charge  the  whole  of  us  with  "  vindicating'  /'* 
Your  candid  confession,  of  "  want  of  information,"  is  the  wily 
reparation  which  can  ever  atone,  for  this  outrage  upon  indivi 
dual  character,  as  well  as  upon  that  noble  institution,  the  Colo 
nization  Society,  which  you  so  unjustly  assail. 

From  the  report  of  Mr.  Stone's  speech,  before  the  conven 
tion  at  Baltimore,  the  following  extract  is  worthy  of  preserva 
tion,  and  is  affectionately  commended  to  your  candour  and  in 
telligence,  with  the  single  remark,  that  it  expresses  the  feelings 
and  views  of  the  great  body  of  colonizationists,  whom  you 
vilify,  and  is  strictly  in  conformity  with  the  sentiments  of  the 
society,  which  you  so  strangely  misrepresent.  It  is  appended 


*  He  wrote  a  vindication  of  the  Colonization  Society,  so  long  ago 
as  1819,  and  though  he  wavered  for  a  time,  by  reason  of  the  delusive 
hopes  of  the  Haytien  project,  yet  he  continues  still,  with  thousands  of 
us,  to  advocate  colonization,  because  he  is  an  abolitionist. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  65 

to  an  argument,  in  favour  of  a  scheme  of  "  emancipation  and 
colonization,"  under  the  patronage  of  the  general  government. 

"  In  undertaking  a  work  of  this  magnitude,  compromises  will 
be  found  as  necessary  as  they  were  in  forming  the  federal  com 
pact.  We  must  take  men  as  they  are,  and  things  as  they  are. 
And  we  must  move  in  this  business  with  a  FULL  CONVICTION, 
that  the  slaveholders  and  slave  states  must  act  with  us,  in 
this  matter.  They  must  give  their  consent  to  the  emancipa 
tion  of  their  slaves,  and  we  must  offer  the  inducements.  It  will 
not  do,  therefore,  to  rejine  too  much.  And  although  we  do  not 
believe  it  lawful,  in  the  sight  of  heaven,  to  hold  flesh  and 
blood  as  property,  still  we  must,  from  motives  of  expediency, 
act  as  though  it  were  so.  We  have  no  disposition  to  interfere 
with  the  rights  of  property,  nor  with  the  subsisting  relations  be 
tween  master  and  slave.  We  would  not  liberate  the  slaves  en 
masse,  in  their  present  condition,  and  let  them  loose  upon  this 
community,  but  would  transport  them,  with  their  own  consent, 
if  possible,  or  prepare  them  to  enjoy  the  blessings  of  freedom 
in  some  part  of  our  own  country.  We  have  not  come  to  the 
south,  to  scatter  firebrands,  arrows,  and  death,  but  to  meet  our 
southern  friends  on  neutral  ground,  and  join  them  in  a  mighty 
effort  to  rid  them  of  an  evil  which  they  all  affect  to  deplore." 

With  the  foregoing  reference  to  abolition  societies,  and  ex 
tracts  from  the  language  of  a  "  leading  colonizationist,"  I  leave 
them,  and  him,  to  the  judgment  and  candour  of  the  reader,  who 
may  form  his  own  opinion,  of  your  attempt  to  identify  the 
former  with  the  anti-slavery  societies,  or  impute  to  the  latter, 
the  destitution  of  principle  of  which  you  accuse  him. 

After  vainly  attempting  to  identify  yourself  and  your  asso 
ciates  with  the  former  "  abolition  societies,"  you  inadvertently 
refute  yourself  by  admitting  that  they  were  for  "  gradual 
abolition,"  while  you  utterly  repudiate  all  gradualism.  I 
shall,  therefore,  waive  all  farther  reference  to  this  topic 
at  present,  and  proceed  to  notice  your  complaints  that  the 
"  rights"  of  abolitionists  have  been  invaded  by  colonizationists. 
And  as  among  the  first  and  most  formidable  in  your  list  of 
grievances,  you  have  placed  Colonel  W.  L.  Stone,  editor  of  the 
Commercial  Advertiser,  and  very  frequently  in  your  book  al- 
uded  to  him,  and  his  press  I  shall  here  allow  him  to  speak 
7* 


66  LETTERS  TO   THE 

for  himself  in  reference  to  the  most  prominent  of  the  charge* 
you  so  unjustly  make  against  him.  I  deem  this  course  due  tc 
that  estimable  man,  whom  I  regard  as  a  fellow  Christian,  and 
especially  because  the  Commercial  Advertiser,  he  conducts,  is  so 
valuable  an  auxiliary  to  every  good  work,  that  its  vindication 
is  a  subject  in  which  the  cause  of  public  morals  is  largely  in 
volved.  I  extract  the  following  from  the  Commercial  Adver 
tiser,  of  March  24th,  1835. 

"  Truly  we  have  fallen  upon  evil  times  and  evil  days.  Never 
did  we  expect  to  meet  with  such  a  book,  from  the  pen  of  the 
son  and  biographer  of  the  illustrious  John  Jay.  And  such  a 
son  ! — a  man  of  high  political  and  moral  worth — of  scholarship, 
and  sound  integrity.  But  fanaticism  is  a  contagion,  which 
sometimes  seizes  upon  the  gifted  arid  the  good,  as  well  as  upon 
the  weak  brother,  and  the  bolder  hypocrite.  Of  this  truth,  we 
have  a  melancholy  instance  before  us — affording  another  ex 
ample  of  the  exceeding  virulence  of  this  last  species  of  fanati 
cism,  which,  like  the  cholera  among  diseases,  exceeds  in  malig 
nant  power  all  that  have  gone  before  it.  Why  it  should  be  so, 
we  know  not :  but  it  seems  to  be  the  fact,  that  wherever,  and 
upon  whomsoever,  this  spirit  of  immediate  and  unconditional 
abolitionism  fastens  itself,  it  drives  reason  from  her  empire ; 
divests  Christianity  of  all  her  sweetest  charities  and  graces  ; 
sears  the  conscience  as  with  a  hot  iron ;  and  tramples  the  Diyine 
attribute  of  Truth  under  foot.  Mr.  Jay  has  selected  for  his 
motto,  the  following  passage  from  Milton : — '  Give  me  the 
liberty  to  know,  to  utter,  and  to  argue  freely,  according  to  my 
conscience,  above  all  liberties.'  The  sentiment  is  good  as  far 
as  it  goes  ;  but  before  we  shall  have  completed  the  present  ar 
ticle,  the  reader  will  have  reason  to  regret  that  the  author  had 
not  governed  himself  by  another  maxim,  to  be  found  likewise 
in  an  English  poet,  yet  older  than  Milton,  and  equally  il 
lustrious. 

.     .     "  '  In  thy  right  hand  carry  gentle  peace. 

^ Be  JUST,  and  fear  not :  ^ 

Let  all  the  ends  thou  aim'st  at,  be  thy  country's, 
Thy  GOD'S,  and  TRUTH'S  ;  then  if  thou  fall'st, 
Thou  fall'st  a  blessed  martyr.' 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  67 

"  Had  the  author  selected  such  a  motto,  and  written  in  its 
spirit,  we  should  have  been  spared  the  pain  of  writing  the  pre 
sent  article, — which,  from  the  high  regard  we  have  ever  enter 
tained  for  Mr.  Jay,  and  the  affection  we  cherish  for  him  still, 
notwithstanding  the  cruel  misrepresentations  by  which  we  are 
assailed  in  the  volume  before  us,  renders  its  composition  one  of 
the  most  unpleasant  acts  of  editorial  duty  we  have  for  many 
years  been  called  upon  to  discharge. 

"  A  highly  valued  clerical  friend  admonished  us  the  other 
day,  that  the  immediate  abolitionists  in  this  city  were  engaged 
in  a  desperate  effort  to  fasten  the  responsibility  of  the  abolition 
riots  of  last  summer,  upon  the  Commercial  Advertiser,  and  the 
writer  of  this  article  in  particular  ;  and  he  advised  us  to  be  pre 
pared  for  an  attack,  (from  a  quarter  least  expected,)  which  it 
would  be  necessary  for  us  to  meet  with  firmness  and  decision. 
The  caution  was  given  in  relation  to  the  work  now  before  us. 

"  But  the  information  as  to  the  existence  of  the  foul  design 
respecting  the  riots,  was  not  new.  It  is  an  effort  in  which  both 
the  tongues  and  the  pens  of  the  immediate  abolitionists  have 
been  engaged,  with  an  energy  and  a  zeal  worthy  of  a  better 
cause,  ever  since  they  themselves,  by  their  own  publications, 
and  their  own  acts,  spoke  those  riots  into  existence,  and  had 
well  nigh  perished  in  thejiames  of  their  own  kindling.  And 
it  is  in  furtherance  of  this  design,  that  the  author  has  been  in 
duced  by  evil  counsellors,  to  put  forth  the  volume  before  us, 
and  in  which  it  is  melancholy  to  find,  that  such  a  man  as  WIL 
LIAM  JAY  should  appear,  not  only  in  alliance  with  the  notorious 
Garrison,  but  as  his  apologist — nay.  his  eulogist !  Equally  pain 
ful,  also,  and  greatly  amazing,  will  it  be  to  the  friends  of  Mr.  Jay, 
to  find  his  name  in  the  title  of  a  book,  consisting,  in  a  great 
measure,  of  the  unfair  and  garbled  extracts  from  the  publica 
tions  of  the  Colonization  Society,  and  of  others  friendly  to  it, 
or  perhaps  connected  with  it,  which  have  for  a  few  years  past 
graced  the  columns  of  the  New-York  Evangelist,  and  such 
scandalous  journals,  as  Garrison's  Liberator,  and  the  Emanci 
pator.  And  yet  such  is  the  fact.  The  Hon.  William  Jay, 
strange  as  it  may  appear,  has  been  persuaded — it  needs  no 
familiar  to  tell  by  what  coterie  of  pseudo  philanthropists — to 
lend  his  name  to  such  a  compilation — accompanying  it  with 


68  LETTERS  TO  THE 

remarks  conceived  in  the  same  spirit  of  candour,  which  first 
prompted  the  system  of  garbled  quotations,  for  the  purpose  of 
charging  upon  the  Colonization  Society  and  its  friends,  the 
maintenance  of  doctrines,  opinions,  and  designs,  which  they 
have  not  only  never  entertained,  but  have  uniformly  and  most 
emphatically  repudiated. 

"  The  practice  of  these  abolitionists  in  this  matter,  has  been 
upon  precisely  the  same  principle  that  the  Atheist  proves  from 
the  Bible  that  '  there  is  no  GodJ  viz. :  by  omitting  the  ante 
cedent  and  most  important  portion  of  the  sentence — '  The  fool 
hath  said  in  his  heart?  It  is  exactly  after  that  manner,  that 
this  journal  has  been  treated  by  the  abolitionists  in  regard  to 
the  riots  of  last  summer.  For  instance,  when  in  common  with 
a  vast  majority  of  the  most  respectable  people  in  this  city,  we 
saw  to  what  the  perverse  counsels  of  the  immediate  abolition 
ists  were  leading,  we  should  have  been  recreant  to  our  duty, 
had  we  not  remonstrated.  After  Garrison's  shameful  calum 
nies  upon  his  own  country  in  Europe — uttered,  too,  in  the  pre 
sence  of  such  men  as  Anson  G.  Phelps,  and  Thomas  A.  Ro 
nalds,  of  this  city,  it  was*. easy  to  foresee  that  his  presence  here, 
to  form  a  society  in  furtherance  of  his  wretched  theories, 
would  inevitably  lead  to  tumult.  The  abolitionists  were  told 
as  much — though  not  in  this  paper,  however,  as  has  been  false 
ly  asserted.  But  they  persisted  in  their  course  ;  and  the  result 
was  such  as  might,  have  been  anticipated,  and  in  some  respects, 
as  all  good  men  deplored.  Nor  did  they  learn  wisdom  from 
experience  ;  but  from  that  day,  until  the  disgraceful  riots  of 
July,  the  course  of  these  misguided  people  was  the  same,  or 
rather,  it  was  marked,  from  day  to  day,  with  increasing  folly. 
The  scenes  of  May,  in  the  Chatham-street  Chapel,  will  not 
soon  be  forgotten.  It  was  in  vain  that  we  protested,  over  and 
over  again,  against  such  transactions,  and  admonished  the  lead 
ers  of  the  consequences  in  which  they  would  result,  and  which, 
in  a  community  so  highly  and  wickedly  exasperated,  no  wis 
dom  nor  forecast  would  be  able  to  prevent. 

"  The  public  and  ostentatious  examination  of  the  worthless 
instrument,  Brown,  and  the  loathsome  questions  which  the 
managers  of  that  wretched,  but  insulting  farce,  put  to  him, 
awakened  a  storm  of  popular  indignation  which  could  scarcely 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  69 

then  be  controlled.  Afterwards  followed  the  inflammatory  lec 
tures  in  the  chapel ;  and  in  connexion  therewith,  a  notice  of  a 
fouth  of  July  celebration  of  the  fanaticism,  to  be  held  at  the 
same  place.  It  occurred  to  us  at  once,  and  not  to  us  only, 
that  such  a  celebration,  on  such  an  occasion,  when  all  the 
elements  of  popular  violence  would  be  in  motion,  would  be  an 
exceedingly  hazardous  experiment,  and  we  deemed  it  a  duty 
to  write  and  publish  a  temperate  remonstrance  against  the 
procedure.  But  as  before  without  effect.  The  result  is  known. 

"  Now  we  do  not  pretend  to  say,  that  the  leaders  of  the  aboli 
tionists  actually  designed  to  bring  about  those  riots.  We  do 
not  believe  they  did.  But  their  object  was  indisputably  to 
produce  a  strong  degree  of  excitement ;  and  they  succeeded, 
by  means  of  their  meetings,  their  inflammatory  newspapers,  and 
their  incendiary  handbills,  written  by  one  of  the  principal 
officers  of  their  society,  in  effecting  a  higher  degree  of  excite 
ment  than  they  intended.  Still,  we  concede,  that  they  did  not 
really  mean  to  stimulate  to  riot ;  but  we  are  free  to  say,  at  the 
same  time,  that  if  it  were  our  design  now,  to  kindle  another 
series  of  riots,  we  should,  as  the  most  certain  method,  pursue 
exactly  the  course  which  they  then  pursued.  But  against  all 
these  things  we  remonstrated  ;  and  because  we  did  so,  and  the 
results  corresponded  with  our  predictions,  the  authors  of  the 
incendiary  publications,  and  the  Chatham-street  scenes,  which, 
beyond  all  doubt,  caused  the  riots,  turned  short  about,  and  have 
from  that  day  to  the  present  made  the  country  ring  with 
charges  against  us,  of  creating  riots  fomented  by  themselves, 
and  against  the  measures  leading  to  which  we  were  solemnly 
imploring  and  protesting. 

"  We  now  come  to  the  book  itself,  of  which  the  reader  will 
already  have  formed  some  idea  from  what  is  said,  and  truly 
said,  above.  The  volume  is,  from  beginning  to  end,  a  con 
tinued  attack  upon  the  Colonization  Society  and  its  friends — 
filled  with  acrimonious  and  illiberal  allegations  against  that 
noble  institution,  which  the  author  obviously  perceives  to  be 
the  '  great  mountain'  in  the  way  of  the  visionary  schemes  in 
which  he  has  embarked  ;  and,  as  we  have  already  intimated, 
we  are  sorry  to  say  that  he  repeats  and  endorses  all  the  stereo 
typed  calumnies  of  the  Garrison  tribe  of  scribblers,  though  so 


70  LETTERS  TO  THE 

often  disclaimed  and  refuted.  And  in  this  crusade  against  the 
society,  standing  in  the  relation  to  it  which  we  have  done  for 
years  past,  it  was  hardly  to  have  been  expected  that  we  should 
escape  at  least  a  passing  notice. 

"  In  common  with  many  others,  therefore,  abler  and  better 
than  ourselves,  the  writer  of  this  article  has  been  selected  by 
name,  for  vindictive  reprobation.  But  we  do  not  murmur  at 
the  distinction  of  being  thus  included  in  the  same  denunciation 
with  the  great  and  good  men  of  this  land — many  of  whom  are 
named  in  terms  which  could  hardly  have  been  expected  from 
the  author — a  circumstance  which  can  only  be  accounted  for 
by  the  bewildering  mental  and  moral  association  to  which  he 
now  belongs.  We  have  no  room  to  go  into  any  detailed  re 
futation  of  the  gross  misrepresentations  of  fact  and  of  senti 
ment,  to  be  found  in  this  book,  and  must  content  ourselves  with 
a  single  example — an  example,  however,  which  will  fall  with 
withering  effect  upon  the  work  of  which  it  is  a  specimen.  *We 
quote  the  following  passage  : 

"  '  The  abolitionists  in  New-York  gave  notice  of  a  meeting 
for  forming  a  City  Anti-Slavery  Society.  In  reference  to  this 
notice,  the  chairman  of  the  executive  committee  of  the  New- 
York  Colonization  Society,  Mr.  Stone,  published  in  his  paper, 
2d  October,  1833,  the  following : 

"  '  Is  it  possible,  that  our  citizens  can  look  quietly  on,  while 
the  flames  of  discord  are  rising?  while  even  our  pulpits.,  are 
sought  to  be  used  for  the  base  PURPOSE  of  encouraging  scenes 
of  bloodshed  in  our  land.  If  we  do,  can  we  look  our  southern 
brethren  in  the  face,  and  say,  we  are  opposed  to  interfering  with 
their  rights  ?  No,  we  cannot. 

"  '  The  HINT  thus  kindly  given,  was  readily  taken,  and  a  mob 
of  5000  scattered  the  abolitionists.' — Jay^s  Inquiry,  pp.  110,  111. 

"Now,  what  is  the  inference  which  the  unsophisticated  reader 
will  draw  from  this  extract?  And  what  was  the  inference 
which  the  author  intended  his  readers  should  draw  from  it  ? 
Does  he  not  mean,  by  the  use  of  a  little  adroit  phraseology,  to 
charge  upon  us  the  passage  which  he  has  quoted  from  the  Com 
mercial  of  October  2d,  1833,  as  an  editorial  article,  sanctioned 
by  an  officer  of  the  Colonization  Society,  as  such?  Does*"!he 
not,  moreover,  intend  to  be  understood  as  charging  this  publica 
tion  upon  Mr.  Stone,  with  the  express  design  of  creating  a  riot  ? 
It  cannot  be  otherwise.  The  public  will  understand  him  as 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  7I> 

meaning  to  impute  alike  the  sentiment,  the  authorship,  and  the 
base  design  of  creating  a  riot,  to  Mr.  Stone.  '  The  hint,  thus 
kindly  given,  &c.  Does  not  Mr.  Jay  mean  to  say,  that  Mr. 
Stone  intentionally  gave  the  populace  a  hint  to  go  and  break  up 
the  meeting '?  It  cannot  be  otherwise.  What,  then,  will  the 
public  think,  when  informed,  that  Mr.  Stone  did  not  write  the 
article  which  Mr.  Jay  pretends  to  quote  from  him,  and  that  it 
was  never  published  editorially  in  the  Commercial  Advertiser 
at  all ! 

"  What  will  the  public,  moreover,  say  of  the  conduct  of  Mr. 
Jay  in  this  matter,  when  informed  of  the  fact,  that  in  that  very 
same  paper  of  October  2d,  1833,  the  leading  editorial  article, 
written  by  Mr.  Stone  himself,  was  of  directly  the  opposite  ten 
dency,  vindicating  the  right  of  the  abolitionists  to  hold  their 
meeting,  and  exhorting  every  person  entertaining  opposite  or 
different  sentiments,  to  keep  away  !  Nay,  more  :  so  far  from 
fanning  the  embers  of  popular  excitement,  or  writing  the  para 
graph  imputed  to  him,  Mr.  Stone  protested  strongly  against  an 
article  having  obviously  such  a  tendency,  which  appeared  in 
a  morning  paper  of  that  day  !  Yet  such  are  the  facts,  and 
the  Commercial  Advertiser  of  October  2d,  1833,  shall  speak  for 
itself: — The  truth  of  the  matter  is — and  Mr.  Jay  must  have 
known  as  much,  unless  he  has  been  imposed  upon,  by 

Men  that  make 

Envy,  and  crooked  malice,  nourishment. 

And  who  '  dare  bite  the  best,' — that  the  passage  quoted  by  Mr. 
Jay  is  an  excerpt  from  a  communication,  published  as  such,  and 
prefaced  by  the  following  editorial  disclaimer,  and  expression  of 
our  own  views : 

"  From  the  Commercial  Advertiser  of  October  2,  1833. 

"ANTI-SLAVERY — THE  MEETING  TO-NIGHT. — By  a  notice  which 
has  been  published  in  this,  as  well  as  other  papers,  the  friends 
of  the  immediate  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  United  States,  are 
requested  to  meet,  this  evening,  at  Clinton  Hall,  to  form  a 
'  New-York  City  Anti-Slavery  Society.3 

"  In  one  sense,  the  terms  of  the  notice  may  be  construed  into 
a  universal  invitation  of  our  citizens  to  attend  the  meeting,  in 
asmuch  as  upon  the  abstract  and  naked  question  of  an  immedi 
ate  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  United  States,  there  can  be  but 
one  voice  in  the  community.  We  are  all,  to  a  man,  in  favour 


72  LETTERS   TO   THE 

of  the  measure,  provided  it  can  be  immediately  accomplished 
without  danger  to  the  whites,  without  injury  to  the  slaves 
themselves,  without  jeoparding  the  peace  and  safety  of  the 
union,  and  upon  the  principles  of  equal  and  exact  justice  to  all 
men.  But  viewed  in  all  its  bearings,  there  is  a  wide  difference 
of  opinion  between  those  who,  par  excellence,  profess  them 
selves  immediate  abolitionists,  and  the  far  greater  number  of 
our  own  citizens,  equally  opposed  to  slavery,  but  who  desire  to 
pursue  some  rational  plan  for  its  ultimate  and  certain  extin 
guishment,  by  which  the  rights  and  feelings  of  the  slavehold 
ers  shall  be  consulted,  and  the  condition  of  the  slave  improved 
on  his  emancipation.  And  as  the  gentlemen  who  have  called 
the  meeting  are  bitterly  opposed  to  the  great  majority  last  de 
scribed,  it  is  fair  to  suppose  their  notice  to  be  exclusive  in  its 
intention.  At  any  rate,  we  have  so  been  inclined  to  receive  it. 
Much,  therefore,  as  we  lament  the  calling  of  such  a  meeting, 
at  this  time,  and  under  existing  circumstances,  yet  the  right  of 
calling  it  cannot  be  questioned.  The  friends  of  immediate 
emancipation,  regardless  of  circumstances  and  consequences 
the  most  fearful  and  appalling,  have  as  good  a  right  to  their 
opinions,  and  to  meet,  and  discuss,  and  propagate  them,  as 
we  have  to  entertain  and  inculcate  ours.  Hence  WE  HAVE  SEEN, 
WITH  REGRET,  an  inflammatory  article  in  a  morning  paper,  the 
evident  design  and  tendency  of  which  is  to  produce  the  attend 
ance  of  persons  not  intended  to  be  invited,  for  purposes  of 
opposition,  which  must  result  in  uproar  and  confusion.  THIS 
IS  WRONG.  The  gentlemen  calling  the  meeting  are  very 
respectable.  They  are  deeply  and  sadly  in  error,  according  to 
our  views  of  the  great  question  which  is  now  beginning  to  agi 
tate  the  union,  with  more  dangerous  throes  than  at  any  former 
period.  Still,  they  have  their  rights,  and  should  be  allowed  to 
pursue  their  own  measures,  so  long  as  those  measures  are  legal 
and  peaceable,  without  molestation  from,  any  source.  We,  there 
fore,  hope  that  no  persons  will  attend  the  meeting,  who  are  op 
posed  to  the  objects  of  it,  excepting  merely  as  spectators — 
taking  no  part,  and  presenting  no  obstructions,  unless  the  gen 
tlemen  conducting  the  meeting  should  feel  disposed  to  present 
an  opportunity  for  free  and  manly  debate.  With  this  brief  ex 
pression  of  our  views,  we  give  place,  at  the  special  request  of 
the  writer,  to  the  following  communication. 

"  With  what  spirit  the  author  was  actuated,  who,  with  this  ar 
ticle  before  his  eyes,  dares  to  accuse  us  of  giving  a  '  HINT,' 
for  the  purpose  of  producing  a  mob,  we  leave  to  honest  men  of 
any  party  to  decide.  We  do  not  believe  that  Mr.  Jay  has  done 
this  passage  of  his  book  entirely  himself;  but  we  do  not  envy 
the  author  of  the  misrepresentation,  whoever  he  may  be,  the 


HON.  WILLIAM   JAY.  73 

reflections  it  will  one  day  afford,  living'  or  dying.  The  insinu 
ation,  therefore,  amounting,  in  fact,  to  a  direct  and  positive 
charge,  that  the  { hint'  was  ever  given  for  the  assembling  of 
a  mob,  by  the  editors  of  the  Commercial  Advertiser,  though 
frequently  repeated  in  the  volume  before  us,  is  UNTRUE  ;  and  we 
appeal  with  confidence—not  to  the  garbled  quotations  or  bald 
assertions  of  the  abolitionists — but  to  the  columns  of  the 
paper  itself,  from  the  date  of  the  foregoing  article  until  the  dis 
graceful  riots  which  took  place  nine  months  afterwards,  foi 
proof  of  our  position. 

"  We  may  have  occasion  to  recur  to  this  subject  again ;  but  for 
the  present  let  the  foregoing  suffice.  Meantime,  if  the  author 
'  knows  the  things  which  belongs  to  his  peace,'  he  will  not 
only  lament  the  publication  of  such  a  book,  but  repent  of  the 
evil  he  has  attempted  to  inflict  upon  us." 

Having  thus  allowed  the  Commercial  Advertiser,  and  its 
editor,  to  speak  for  themselves,  I  shall  make  no  allusion 
to  the  extracts  you  make  from  the  Courier  and  Enquirer; 
for  its  editor,  Mr.  James  Watson  Webb,  has  never,  to 
my  knowledge,  been  identified  with  the  Colonization  Soci 
ety.  And  from  the  specimen  just  furnished  of  your  quo 
tations  from  the  Commercial  Advertiser,  I  confess  I  have  little 
confidence  in  the  accuracy  of  your  quotations,  presuming,  as  I 
am  bound  to  do,  that  in  both  cases,  the  extracts  are  among  the 
materials  furnished  you,  for  writing  your  "  inquiry,"  for  I  will 
not  suspect  you  of  the  perversions,  and  suppression  of  the 
truth,  of  which  Colonel  Stone  has  convicted  your  book.  For  if 
I  believed  you  capable  of  the  moral  obliquity,  which  such  sus 
picion  would  imply,  not  even  your  name,  or  reputation,  or  pro 
fession  of  Christianity  itself,  should  have  induced  me  to  this 
correspondence. 

It  is  idle,  however,  to  pretend,  that  the  mobs  and  riots,  of 
which  you  complain,  were  occasioned  by  newspapers,  or  editors, 
whether  justly,  or  unjustly,  styled  colonizationists.  Every  can 
did  and  disinterested  witness  of  those  disgraceful  scenes,  must 
have  attributed  them  to  other,  and  far  more  potent  causes.  It 
was  actions,  which  speak  louder  than  words,  from  which  the 
mischiefs  you  deplore  clearly  originated  ;  and  it  is  unphilosophi- 
cal  and  absurd,  "  to  attribute  an  effect  to  more  causes  than  are 
8 


74  LETTERS  TO  THE 

necessary  for  its  existence."  And  it  requires  not  the  spirit  of  pro 
phesy  to  discern,  that  if  there  were  no  Colonization  Society  in  ex 
istence,  and  if  all  the  colonization  presses  should  be  silent,  the 
same  conduct  then  pursued  by  your  associates  of  the  Anti-Sla 
very  Society,  would  produce  similar  results,  in  any  large  Ame 
rican  community.  But  as  I  have  elsewhere,  in  my  "  acrimo 
nious  pamphlet,"  expressed  my  opinions  on  this  subject  deli 
berately  formed,  and  published  under  a  deep  sense  of  duty  and 
responsibility,  I  forbear  to  enlarge,  since  my  present  convictions 
on  that  subject  remain  unchanged. 

I  must,  however,  refer  for  a  moment  to  the  extraordinary  pa 
ragraph  on  your  112th  page,  in  which,  you  accuse  the  socie 
ty  of  pouring  "  obloquy  and  violence"  upon  the  abolitionists, 
for  the  purpose  of  "  INTIMIDATION."  The  reason  of  the  alleged 
resort  to  intimidation  is  thus  expressed : 

"  Utterly  vain  is  the  hope  of  maintaining  the  cause  of  coloni 
zation,  or  of  suppressing  that  of  abolition,  by  discussion."* And 
then  you  add,  with  a  self-complacency,  at  which  even  your  own 
party  must  smile,  "  In  every  instance  !  in  which  colonization- 
ists  have  ventured  to  meet  their  opponents  in  public  disputation, 
they  have  invariably  retired  with  diminished  strength." 

If  you  did  not  expect,  sir,  that  in  your  very  name,  resides  "  a 
tower  of  strength,"  you  might  have  condescended  to  have  given 
us  some  other  authority  for  this  sweeping  clause  of  your'book, 
by  naming  some  one  from  among  "  every  instance,"  when  pub- 
Kc  disputation  has  thus  terminated.  You  do  not,  surely,  pre 
tend  to  speak  from  personal  knowledge,  of  "  every  instance  in 
which  colonizationists  have  ventured  to  meet  their  opponents 
in  public  disputation,"  and  therefore  must  have  given  this  de 
cision  upon  the  authority  of  the  Liberator,  Emancipator,  or 
Evangelist.  Par  nobile  Jratrum,  sir,  I  admit,  but  neither  of 
these  are  distinguished  for  accuracy,  else  by  repeating  their 
dogmas,  you  had  escaped  the  multiplied  mistakes,  to  which  it 
has  been  my  painful  duty  to  direct  your  attention.  In  New- 
York,  where  the  fact  of  Mr.  Finlay's  annihilation  of  that  mis 
guided,  but  excellent  man,  Mr.  Jocelyn,  is  so  recent,  and  so 
well  remembered,  this  assertion  of  yours  provokes  a  smile. 
And  your  "  want  of  information"  on  this  point,  has  certainly 
obliterated  from  your  memory,  the  "  public  discussion"  of  the 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  75 

anniversary  week  in  May  last,  in  Chatham  Chapel,  in  the  con 
secutive  meetings  of  the  two  societies,  the  result  of  which  has 
been,  ever  since,  visible  in  the  subdued  tone,  and  "  diminished 
strength,"  of  the  defeated  abolitionists. 

In  conclusion,  let  me  briefly  notice  your  attempt  to  gainsay 
the  character  of  the  society  as  a  "  religious  institution,"  when 
you  ask,  "  In  what  sense  can  the  society  be  termed  a  religious 
one?"  I  answer,  because  it  originated  in  "humanity  and  be 
nevolence  to  the  oppressed  ;" — was  founded  after  solemn  and 
united  prayer,  for  the  divine  guidance,  by  Finlay  and  his  asso 
ciates,  whose  religion  prompted  them  to  this  good  work.  That 
it  is  truly  a  religious  society,  may  be  safely  inferred  from  your 
own  showing,  when  you  say,  on  p.  116,  "  The  Colonization  So 
ciety,  unquestionably,  comprises  a  vast  number  of  as  pure  and 
devoted  Christians,  as  can  be  found  in  this,  or  any  other  coun 
try  !"  and  again,  "  that  multitudes  of  religious  men  belong  to 
the  Colonization  Society  is  not  denied  /"  When,  then,  you 
demand,  "  in  what  sense  can  the  society  be  termed  a  religious 
one,"  I  refer  you  to  these  admissions,  by  which,  as  you  law 
yers  are  wont  to  say,  you  "  admit  yourself  out  of  court." 

Bat  you  next  affirm,  that  it  is  not  professedly  founded  on  any 
one  principle  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  To  this,  it  might  be  suf 
ficient  to  reply,  that  so  long  as  the  "  golden  rule"  is  one  prin 
ciple  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,  Christian  colonizationists  repel 
this  statement,  by  declaring,  that  in  colonizing  the  free  people 
of  colour  on  the  coast  of  Africa  with  their  own  consent,  they 
are  "  doing  unto  others,  as  they  would  have  others  do  unto 
them,"  in  like  circumstances.  And  in  view  of  that  judgment 
to  which  we  are  hastening,  and  of  which,  sir,  you  take  fre 
quent  occasion  to  remind  us,  I  am  free  to  declare,  that  such  is 
the  "  principle  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,"  on  which  my  vindica 
tion  of  the  society  is  "founded."  and  by  which  I  am  influ 
enced  in  common  with  thousands  of  my  Christian  brethren  in 
the  north  and  the  south,  of  my  own  and  sister  denominations. 

You  tell  us,  indeed,  that  the  society  "  extends  no  one  act  of 
benevolence  towards  the  free  blacks  in  this  country,"  and  here 
you  differ,  toto  c&lo,  from  your  fellow  labourer,  Charles  Stew 
art,  who  says, 

"  For  the  few  coloured  people  who  prefer  leaving  their  ns»- 


76  LETTERS  TO  THE 

tiye  country,  and  emigrating  to  Africa,  it  is  unquestionably  a 
great  blessing  /"  But  again,  you  charge  that  "  the  society  takes 
no  measures  to  Christianize  Africa,  but  landing  on  its  shores 
an  ignorant  and  vicious  population  !"  And  this,  sir,  is  one  of 
the  most  unaccountable  assertions  in  your  unaccountable  book. 
After  the  published  testimony  of  British  and  American  visitors 
to  Liberia,  touching  the  general  character  of  the  colonists,  and 
with  the  knowledge  you  must  have  of  the  pious  Christians,  and 
devoted  ministers  of  the  gospel,  whom  the  society  have  sent 
out  among  the  emigrants,  I  marvel  that  you  should  hazard  your 
reputation  on  such  a  declaration,  that  it  "  takes  no  measures  to 
Christianize  Africa,  but  landing  a  vicious  population  on  its 
shores."  I  might  point  you  to  the  "  measures"  it  has  taken  to 
promote  schools,  and  the  building  of  churches,  in  the  colony,  as 
well  as  the  facilities  the  society  offers  to  Christian  missiona 
ries  of  all  denominations,  and  for  which  it  has  received  the 
grateful  expression  of  thanks  from  more  than  one  board* of 
foreign  missions.  And  I  will  only  add,  that  the  expedition  of 
select  emigrants,  which  lately  sailed  from  New-Orleans,  is,  of 
itself,  an  ample  refutation  of  the  accusation  of  only  '"'landing 
an  ignorant  and  vicious  population  on  the  shores  of  Africa." 
Allow  me  again  to  introduce  the  contradiction  given  to  you 
here  by  that  same  Charles  Stewart,  to  whom  allusion  has  been 
made,  and  who  is,  even  now,  itinerating  through  the  north  and 
east,  as  a  British  agent  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society, 
who  says, 

"  The  highest  praise  of  the  Colonization  Society,  and  a 
praise  which  the  writer  cordially  yields  to  it,  is  the  fact,  that 
it  forms  a  new  centre,  whence,  as  from  our  Sierra  Leone,  and 
the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  civilization  and  Christianity  are  ra 
diating  through  the  adjoining  darkness.  In  this  respect,  no 
praise  can  equal  the  worth  of  these  settlements  /" 

But  lastly,  you  add,  that  "  it  employs  no  missionary,  it  sends 
no  Bible,  and  it  cannot  point  to  a  single  native  converted  to  the 
faith  of  Jesus  through  its  instrumentality."  That  the  society 
is  exclusively  devoted  to  the  single  object  of  colonization,  is,  <3f 
itself,  an  ample  reason,  why  it  should  not  depart  from  its  ap 
propriate  sphere,  yet,  "  through  its  instrumentality,"  a  great 
many  missionaries  have  been  sent  by  the  societies,  devoted  to  that 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  77 

department,  as  the  names  of  Cox,  Laird,  Cloud,  Wright, 
Spaulding,  Seys,  and  Pinney,  among  the  whites,  beside  a  num 
ber  of  coloured  missionaries,  and  male  and  female  teachers  of 
both  classes,  abundantly  prove.  Bibles,  too,  have  been  sent  by 
the  American  Bible  Society,  and  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Bi 
ble  Society,  for  the  use  of  the  colonists ,  and  the  British  and 
Foreign  Bible  Society  have  availed  themselves  of  the  instru 
mentality  of  the  society  for  the  benefit  of  the  natives,  as  the 
following  extract  of  a  letter  from  Governor  Pinney  will  show, 

"  Several  hundred  Bibles  and  Testaments  in  the  Arabic  lan 
guage,  have  arrived  here  from  England,  very  lately,  a  present 
from  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society.  They  will  give 
light  to  many  a  benighted  soul.  Some  half  a  dozen  were  sent 
to  king  B.  and  other  chiefs,  with  the  commissioners." 

Thus  has  your  "  want  of  information"  placed  you,  sir,  again 
in  an  unenviable  position,  since,  in  the  face  of  such  authentic 
facts,  you  talk  of  "  no  missionary"  and  "  no  Bible,"  in  order  to 
prove  the  society  to  be  "  decidedly  ANTI-CHRISTIAN  !"  Whe 
ther  any  single  native  has  been  "  converted  through  the  instru 
mentality  of  the  society,"  which  you  deny,  may  be  judged  by 
the  letters  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Seys,  already  before  the  public,  and 
by  the  following  extract  from  Mr.  James  Eden's  letter  to  the 
ladies  of  Philadelphia. 

"  I  am  happy  to  inform  you,  that  the  Methodist  people  among 
the  EEOES,  [native*,]  have  erected  a  log  meeting  house,  and 
now  occupy  it  for  public  worship.  During  the  evenings  of  the 
week,  as  you  pass  among  their  humble  dwellings,  you  may  hear 
the  voice  of  prayer  and  praise  to  God,  in  sweet  and  frequent 
concert,  from  many  a  lowly  hut." 

Whether  any  of  these  are  truly  converted,  can  only  be  decided 
at  the  judgment  of  the  great  day,  but  if  there  are,  or  ever 
should  be,  any  natives  converted,  it  is,  or  will  be,  effected, 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  society,  though  itself  "  em 
ploys  no  missionary,  and  sends  no  Bible." 

And  now,  sir,  let  me  ask  how  you  can  screen  yourself  from 
"  the  imputation  of  bigotry  or  prejudice,"  if,  with  these  facts 
before  you,  you  did  not  scruple  to  say  that  "  the  general  influ 
ence  of  the  society  is  decidedly  anti-Christian!''''  And  how  do 
you  reconcile  it  either  with  your  character  or  conscience  to  say, 
8* 


78  LETTERS  TO  THE 

that  this  ANTI-CHRISTIAN  society  contains  "  multitudes  of  reli 
gious  men,"  and  "  unquestionably ',  comprises  a  VAST  NUMBER 
of  as  pure,  and  devoted  CHRISTIANS,  as  can  be  found  in  this,  or 
any  other  country  ?" 

In  reply  to  your  concluding  address  to  the  "  Christian  mem 
bers"  of  this  anti-  Christian  society,  I  would  affectionately  say, 
that  long  before  your  book  admonished  us,  such  have  been  led 
"  to  pause,  to  examine,  and  to  pray,"  and  the  result  has  been, 
that  they  are  colonizationists  still.  In  the  language  of  Gerrit 
Smith,  Esq.,  thousands  of  kindred  spirits  exclaim — 

"  If  nothing  short  of  the  unconditional  destruction  of  the  Co 
lonization  Society  can  appease  your  implacable  malevolence 
towards  it,  know,  then,  that  its  friends  are  as  determined  as  its 
foes.  Our  determination  is  fixed — fixed  as  the  love  of  God, 
and  the  love  of  man  in  our  hearts — that  the  Colonization  So 
ciety,  under  the  blessing  of  Him  who  never,  even  "  for  a  small 
moment,  has  forsaken  it,"  shall  continue  to  live — and  to  live 
too.  until  the  wrongs  of  the  children  of  Africa  amongst  us  are 
redressed,  until  the  slave-trade  has  ceased,  and  the  dark  coasts 
which  it  has  polluted  and  desolated  for  centuries,  are  over 
spread  with  the  beautiful  and  holy  fruits  of  civilization,  and 
the  Christian  religion.  And,  as  we  fear  the  judgments  of  hea 
ven  on  those  who  commit  great  sm,  so  we  dare  not  desert  the 
society,  and  leave  Satan  to  rejoice  over  the  ruin  of  all  this 
"  work  of  faith  and  labour  of  love." 

Finally,  let  me  repeat  the  reasonable  and  salutary  advice  of 
Gamaliel,  to  all  who  unite  with  you  in  your  "  war  of  extermi 
nation"  against  the  Colonization  Society. 

"  And  now  I  say  unto  you,  Refrain  from  these  men,  and  let 
them  alone,  for  if  this  counsel,  or  this  work,  be  of  men,  it  will 
come  to  nought,  but  if  it  be  of  God,  ye  cannot  overthrow  it, 
lest  haply  ye  be  found  even  to  fight  against  God." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


HON,  WILLIAM  JAY.  79 


PART    II. 


LETTER  XI. 


SIR, 

I  COME  now  to  your  second  part,  in  which  you  treat  of  the 
American  Anti-Slavery  Society.  I  have  elsewhere  attempted 
to  show  that  this  society  is  "  Anti-American  in  its  very  na 
ture,"  by  the  unanswered  argument,  that  "  the  liberty  of  the 
free  is  not  more  amply  guarded,  and  fully  secured,  than  is  the 
slavery  of  the  enslaved,  by  the  laws  of  the  land,"  and  that  an 
anti-liberty  society  might,  with  equal  propriety,  arrogate  the 
name  of  American.  You  will  understand  me  to  regard  the 
society  only  in  the  light  of  its  own  constitution,  which  you 
quote,  in  which  we  are  told,  in  the  second  article,  that  its  "  ob 
ject  is  the  entire  abolition  of  slavery,  in  the  United  States,"  or, 
as  it  is  expressed,  in  the  same  article,  "  immediate  abolition, 
without  expatriation."  And  as  you  have  attempted  to  identify 
this  society,  with  the  gradual  abolition  societies,  with  which 
your  illustrious  father  was  associated,  I  invite  your  attention  to 
the  evidence  furnished  in  his  biography,  written  by  yourself, 
that  you  have  unconsciously,  and  inadvertently,  done  injustice 
to  the  memory  of  your  revered  parent.  Let  me  assure  you,  sir, 
that  no  unkind  feelings  to  yourself,  mingle  in  this  effort  to  con 
trast  the  opinions  of  John  Jay,  the  father,  with  those  of  William 
Jay,  fhe  son,  since  both  were,  doubtless,  equally  conscientious 
in  their  views  of  duty  ;  but  my  only  aim  is,  that  the  American 
people  may  be  disabused  of  the  use  made  of  his  distinguished 
name,  and  choose  between  the  contrary  sentiments  of  the 
father  and  the  son. 


80  LETTER?  TO  THE 

And  here  let  me  refer  you  to  a  remarkable  mistake,  in  your 
late  publication,  on  the  146th  page,  when  you  ask, 

"Did  John  Jay  forfeit  the  confidence  of  his  countrymen 
when,  during  the  revolutionary  war,  he  asserted,  '  till  America 
comes  into  this  measure,  (abolition  of  slavery,)  her  prayers  to 
heaven,  for  liberty,  will  be  impious '?' " 

For  the  correction  of  this  mistake,  let  me  now  refer  you  to 
another  work,  entitled,  "  Life  of  John  Jay,  by  his  son  William 
Jay."  vol.  i.  page  229,  in  which  the  sentence  quoted,  reads 
thus: 

"  An  excellent  law  might  be  made  for  New-York,  out  of  the 
Pennsylvania  one,  for  the  GRADUAL  abolition  of  slavery.  Till 
America  comes  into  this  measure,  (gradual  abolition,)  her 
prayers  to  heaven,  for  liberty,  will  be  impious.  This  is  a  strong 
expression,  but  it  is  just.  Were  I  in  your  legislature,  I  would 
prepare  a  bill  for  the  purpose  (of  gradual  abolition)  with  great 
care,  and  I  would  never  cease  moving  it,  till  it  became  a  law, 
or  I  ceased  to  be  a  member." 

Here  is  the  unsophisticated  sentiment  of  John  Jay,  as  re 
corded  with  your  own  hand,  in  1833.  But  how  strange,  that 
in  1835,  with  that  same  hand,  you  should  inadvertently  pervert 
it  to  express,  not  merely  a  different,  but  an  opposite  opinion,  for 
you  introduce  it  in  a  vindication  of  immediate  abolition,  with 
which  it  is  totally  irrelevant. 

This  sentiment  of  your  excellent  father,  which  he  calls,  a 
"  strong  expression,"  is  that  of  nearly  every  colonizationist  in 
the  land,  and  the  society  is  engaged  in  the  very  spirit  he  pro 
fessed,  labouring  "  for  the  purpose  with  great  care,"  a  fea 
ture  which  the  son  ridicules  and  condemns,  as  being  the  dictate 
of  "  expediency." 

But  as  you  lay  great  stress  upon  the  fact,  that  your  venerable 
father  presided  over  the  first  society  ever  formed  for  the  "  aboli 
tion  of  slavery,"  in  1785,  though  you  admit,  that  it  "  advocated 
gi^adual  abolition,"  allow  me  to  refer  you  to  the  same  life'of 
Jay,  vol.  i.  page  231,  for  the  title  of  that  society  which  was, 
"  The  society  for  promoting  the  manumission  of  slaves,  an^l 
protecting  such  of  them  as  have  been,  or  may  be,  liberated." 

Now  it  is  plain  that  there  is  no  one  point  of  parallel  between 
this  society,  and  that  to  which  you  attempt  a  forced  analogy, 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  81 

and  though  it  undoubtedly  exercised  a  moral  influence  in  pro 
moting  voluntary,  and  gradual  abolition,  yet,  in  this  respect,  it 
precisely  resembles  the  Colonization  Society :  and  for  the 
same  proscribed  reason  of  "  expediency,"  the  name  and  object 
of  the  society  does  not  recognize  abolition,  as  the  direct  action 
which  it  should  exert,  but,  like  our  institution,  it  relied  upon  the 
moral  influence  which  should  be  consequent  on  its  success. 

I  must  suppose,  sir,  that  when  you  published  the  life  of  your 
father,  in  1833,  you  had  not  yet  been  innoculated  with  "  imme 
diate  abolitionism,"  much  less  did  you  intend  to  become  the 
vindicator  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society,  or  contem 
plate  the  denunciation  "of  the  American  Colonization  Society, 
within  two  years  afterwards.  And,  if  I  err  in  this  supposition, 
you  will,  at  least,  admit  that  it  is  a  very  natural  one  on  my 
part,  since  the  former  work  furnishes  facts,  and  arguments,  in 
relation  to  John  Jay,  which  place  his  sou,  William  Jay,  upon 
the  antipodes  of  the  present  controversy  j  for  I  hesitate  not  to 
say,  that  the  extracts  I  shall  make  from  your  own  biography  of 
your  father,  will  prove  an  able  and  triumphant  vindication  of 
the  Colonization  Society,  its  principles,  and  practice.  At  the 
same  time,  these  extracts  will  show  the  estimate  which  John  Jay 
would  have  formed  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  had  he  lived, 
to  witness  its  origin.  That  he  would  have  deplored  the  present 
vindication  of  the  latter,  and  aspersion  of  the  former,  and  espe 
cially  by  his  son  and  biographer,  cannot  admit  of  a  doubt. 

To  a  few  of  these  extracts,  let  me  now  invite  your  attention. 
And  first,  did  John  Jay  believe  with  the  Anti-Slavery  Society, 
that  "  slaveholding  was  a  HEINOUS  CRIME  in  the  sight  of  God  ?" 
Let  us  turn  to  his  biography,  and  we  shall  answer  this  question, 
on  your  own  authority  ?  In  vol.  i.  p.  230,  we  learn,  that  in  the 
year  1779,  he  purchased  a  negro  boy  at  Martinico,  named  Be- 
noit,  and  that  nine  years  afterward,  he  executed  a  formal  man 
umission  of  this  negro  boy,  on  condition  of  a  continuance  to 
serve  his  master  "with  a  common  and  reasonable  degree  of 
fidelity,  for  three  years  from  the  date  hereof,  he  shall  ever  af 
terward  be  a  free  man."  And,  as  the  date  of  this  document  is 
March  21st,  1784,  it  is  manifest,  that  this  boy  continued  in 
slavery  until  two  years  after  Mr.  Jay  became  the  president  of 
the  Manumission  Society. 


82  LETTERS  TO  THE 

But  let  me  now  direct  your  attention  to  page  235,  of  this 
same  volume  of  the  biography  of  John  Jay,  in  which  we  find 
the  following  fact,  by  which  it  appears,  that  he  continued  to 
purchase  and  hold  slaves,  13  years  afterwards. 

"  In  the  year  1798,  John  Jay  being  called  on  by  the  United 
States  Marshal  for  an  account  of  his  taxable  property,  he  ac 
companied  a  list  of  his  slaves  with  the  following  observations  : 

"  I  purchase  slaves,  and  manumit  them  at  proper  ages,  and 
when  their  faithful  services  shall  have  afforded  a  reasonable  re 
tribution."* 

How  many  slaves  he  held,  and  whether  he  continued  to  be 
a  slaveholder  until  the  abolition  of  the  system  from  the  state, 
does  not  appear.  But  surely,  he  did  not  then  believe  "  slave- 
holding  to  be  a  heinous  crime  in  the  sight  of  God  ;"  much  less 
would  he  have  relished  the  denunciation  of  anti-slavery  orators 
and  preachers,  as  being  guilty  of  "robbery,  piracy,  and 
murder  /"  * 

On  the  same  page,  we  find  three  sentences  worthy  of  preser 
vation.  The  first  is  from  yourself,  in  which  you  say  of  the 
Manumission  Society,  over  which  your  father  presided, 

"  The  society  neither  expected,  nor  attempted  to  effect,  any 
sudden  alteration  in  the  laws  relating  to  slavery,  but  its  exer 
tions  were  directed  to  the  protection  of  manumitted  slaves,  and 
to  the  education  of  coloured  children."  ^ 

Now,  contrast  this  with  your  reprobation  of  those  very 
"  laws,"  and  your  argument  for  their  immediate  "  instant  abo 
lition,"  and  you  will  be  ashamed  of  your  attempted  analogy 
between  those  societies  and  that  whose  cause  you  espouse. 

The  second  extract  from  this  page,  is  from  John  Jay,  who 
speaks  of  the  utility  of  that  society  in  promoting  gradual  aboli 
tion,  and  gives  his  "  picture  of  American  slavery,"  which  is 
vastly  unlike  yours : 

"  Manumissions  daily  become  more  common  among  us,  and 
the  treatment  which  slaves  in  general  meet  with,  in  this  state, 
is  very  little  different  from  that  of  other  servants." 

But  a  third  extract,  is  from  your  own  testimony,  in  reference 

*  This  is  what  the  first  annual  report  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery 
Society  calls  a  "  wretched  mockery  of  justice." 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  83 

to  the  " necessity"  imposed  upon  your  father,  to  "purchase 
slaves ;" — though  on  pp.  97  and  98  of  your  present  work,  you 
call  this  "  necessity"  the  "  tyrant's  plea,"  for  "  trampling 
upon  human  rights,  and  outraging  the  plainest  principles  of 
justice  and  humanity."  But  let  us  attend  to  the  extract. 

"  As  free  servants  became  more  common,  he,  (John  Jay,)  was 
gradually  relieved  from  the  NECESSITY  of  purchasing  slaves  ; 
and  the  two  last  which  he  manumitted,  he  retained  for  many 
years  in  his  family,  at  the  customary  wages."  From  this,  we 
learn,  that  if  free  servants  had  not  become  more  common,  this 
necessity  to  purchase  slaves  would  have  continued,  nor  would 
he  have  been  even  "  gradually  relieved"  from  it.  If  this  be 
not  an  "  apology  for  slavery"  in  the  south,  where  free  servants 
are  not  common,  none  has  ever  been  given  by  colonizationists, 
and  I  marvel  that  you  should  have  so  soon  forgotten  it,  in  con 
demning  this  "  tyrant's  plea." 

The  following  merited  tribute  to  your  honoured  father,  on 
page  232,  vol.  i.  of  his  life,  is  a  striking  exhibition  of  the  wis 
dom  of  the  efforts  for  gradual  abolition,  which  you  so  violently 
denounce  ; 

"  It  was  only  by  slow  degrees,  and  through  the  patient  and 
persevering  efforts  of  Mr.  Jay,  and  a  few  other  zealous  pio 
neers,  that  the  obstacles  which  retarded  the  progress  of  free 
dom,  were  gradually  removed,  and  slavery  exterminated  from 
the  soil  of  New-York." 

What  a  reproof  to  the  theory  of  immediate  abolitionism  have 
you  here  furnished,  and  how  conclusively  have  you  refuted  in 
1833,  the  book  you  have  written  in  1835. 

Some  idea  of  the  slow  and  gradual  progress  of  abolition,  in 
our  own  state,  may  be  gathered  by  the  following  extracts  from 
vol.  i.  pp.  3S9  and  396.  I  invite  your  attention  to  the  words 
italicised,  as  evincing  that  John  Jay  wisely  adopted  the  policy 
of  expediency,  which  you  reprobate  in  your  present  book,  as  in 
volving  a  "  lamentable  compromise  of  principle." 

"  When  we  recollect  the  sentiments  uniformly  avowed  by 
Governor  Jay  in  relation  to  slavery,  it  may  seem  singular  that 
no  proposition  for  its  abolition  was  contained  in  his  speech.  It 
was  no  doubt  omitted  from  the  conviction  that,  in  the  present 
state  of  politics,  such  a  proposition  emanating  from  him,  would 


84  LETTERS  TO  THE 

enlist  the  spirit  of  party  in  opposition  to  a  measure,  against 
which  the  prejudices  of  a  large  portion  of  the  community  were 
already  arrayed.  He,  therefore,  deemed  it  most  prudent  that 
the  measure  should  originate  with  the  legislature.  Accord 
ingly,  a  few  days  after  the  commencement  of  the  session,  a 
member  of  the  lower  house,  and  an  intimate  friend  of  the  go 
vernor's,  asked  leave  to  introduce  a  bill  for  the  gradual  aboli 
tion  of  slavery.  This  request,  which  is  usually  granted  as  a 
matter  of  course,  was  unexpectedly  resisted,  and  leave  was 
finally  given  by  a  small  majority.  The  vote  evinced  the  strong 
repugnance  felt  by  the  house,  even  to  take  the  subject  into  con 
sideration.  The  bill  underwent  a  protracted  discussion,  and 
was  ultimately  defeated  by  a  resolve,  that  it  would  be  unjust  to 
deprive  any  citizen  of  his  PROPERTY,  without  a  reasonable  pecu 
niary  compensation,  at  the  expense  of  the  state.  It  was  well 
understood  by  all,  that  on  this  condition,  it  was  impracticable 
to  abolish  slavery  ;  and  no  further  attempt  to  carry  the  bill  was 
made  during  the  session.  An  important  point  had,  however, 
been  gained  by  its  introduction.  The  discussion  had  awakened 
public  attention  to  the  subject,  and  the  friends  of  justice  and 
humanity  were  well  assured,  that  the  more  the  evils  of  slavery 
were  exposed,  the  sooner  would  the  public  demand  its  extinc 
tion."  Vol.  i.  p.  389. 

"  In  January,  1797,  the  legislature  again  assembled,  and  a 
bill  was  brought  into  the  senate  for  the  gradual  abolition  of 
slavery.  The  opposition  to  this  bill  was  less  open  than  that 
which  it  had  experienced  in  the  other  house  the  preceding 
winter,  but  it  was  not,  perhaps,  less  insidious.  Its  considera 
tion  was  postponed  from  time  to  time,  by  a  hostile  majority,  till 
the  session  expired  without  a  vote  being  taken  on  its  merits." 
Vol.  i.  p.  396. 

To  show  that  John  Jay  had  not  changed  his  opinions,  as  late 
as  1819,  I  refer  you  to  page  452  of  his  Life,  vol.  i.,  where  he 
says,  in  a  letter  to  Elias  Boudinot,  "  I  concur  in  the  opinion 
that  slavery  ought  to  be  gradually  diminished,  and  finally 
abolished,  in  all  the  states."  And  this  was  two  years  after  hfe 
and  others,  had  been  successful  in  effecting  gradual  abolition  in 
the  state  of  New-York. 

But  I  would  now  invite  your  attention  to  the  negociations  oi 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  85 

John  Jay,  and  the  provisions  of  the  treaty  he  made  with  Great 
Britain,  for  proof  that  he  regarded  slaves  as  property,  which  you 
regard  a  high  crime  and  misdemeanour  in  the  Colonization  Soci 
ety  and  its  friends.  The  following  sentence  will  be  sufficient 
for  my  purpose,  though  many  more  might  be  furnished  to  the 
same  purpose. 

"  The  treaty  stipulated  that  his  Britannic  Majesty  should 
withdraw  his  armies,  &c.  without  carrying  away  any  negroes 
or  other  PROPERTY  of  the  American  inhabitants."  Vol.  i. 
p.  327.  And  by  a  paragraph  in  vol.  ii.  p.  221,  we  learn  that 
the  negociation  terminated  in  the  recovery  of  the  value  of 
"  those  negroes  who  were  bonajide  the  property  of  Americans 
when  the  war  ceased." 

In  vol.  ii.  p.  317,  we  have  a  correspondence  between  Wilber- 
force  and  Jay,  on  the  subject  of  the  slave-trade,  in  which  refer 
ence  is  had  to  the  "  African  Institution,"  with  the  Duke  of 
Gloucester  at  its  head,  many  members  of  both  houses  of  par 
liament,  &c.  for  the  single  object  of  "promoting  civiliza 
tion  and  improvement  in  Africa  j"  and  it  will  be  seen,  that 
Mr.  Jay  applaudj  the  society  for  the  precise  reason,  that 
multitudes  in  this  country  rejoice  in  the  Colonization  Society. 
He  says, 

"  The  patrons  of  the  African  Institution,  certainly  do  honour 
and  will  probably  do  more  than  ordinary  good  to  Britain, 
against  whom  complaints  have  ascended  both  from  Asia  and 
Africa.  It  is  pleasing  to  see  a  nation  kindly  extending  the 
blessings  of  Christianity  and  civilization  to  Africa." 

But  the  following  letter,  as  you  inform  us,  from  the  pen  of 
John  Jay,  to  the  British  Abolition  Society,  is  also  found  on  page 
232,  vol.  i.,  and  will  be  found  to  express  the  precise  sentiments 
of  colonizationists  against  which  you  declaim  as  giving  evi 
dence  that  they  are  governed  by  "  expediency  instead  of  prin 
ciple,"  that  they  "  excuse  and  justify  slavery,"  and  it  contains 
in  the  strongest  language,  the  conviction  of  its  author,  that  im 
mediate  abolition  could  not  rationally  be  expected.  He  writes 
like  a  statesman  who  knew  and  loved  his  country,  and  felt  the 
delicacies  and  difficulties  of  the  subject,  in  view  of  "  local  in 
terests  and  local  prejudices,"  which  he  acknowledged  to  be  enti 
tled  to  respect,  because  of  "  the  importance  of  union  "  for  an:v 
9 


86  LETTERS  TO  THE 

measure  of  success.  It  will  be  seen  with  what  gentleness  and 
point,  he  rebukes  the  British  for  their  interference,  by  remind 
ing  them  kindly  of  their  own  national  participation  in  the  op 
pression,  while  he  deplores  that  of  his  own  country,  and  attri 
butes  it  to  the  "  particular  circumstances  in  several  of  the 
states."  He  alludes  to  the  fact,  that  slavery  has  become  "in 
corporated  in  the  civil  institutions  and  domestic  economy  of  a 
whole  people,  and  though  an  error,  difficult  to  eradicate."  How 
different  from  the  sentiments,  language,  and  spirit  of  his  son, 
the  reader  will  judge. 
"  GENTLEMEN, 

"  Our  society  has  been  favoured  with  your  letter  of  the  1st  of 
May  last,  and  are  happy  that  efforts  so  honourable  to  the  na 
tion  are  making  in  your  country  to  promote  the  cause  of  justice 
and  humanity  relative  to  the  Africans.  That  they  who  know 
the  value  of  liberty,  and  are  blessed  with  the  enjoyment  of  it, 
ought  not  to  subject  others  to  slavery,  is,  like  most  other  moral 
precepts,  more  generally  admitted  in  theory  than  observed  hi 
practice.  This  will  continue  to  be  too  much  the  case  while 
men  are  impelled  to  action  by  their  passions  rather  than  their 
reason,  and  while  they  are  more  solicitous  to  acquire  wealth 
than  to  do  as  they  would  be  done  by.  Hence  it  is  that  India 
and  Africa  experience  unmerited  oppression  from  nations  who 
have  been  long  distinguished  by  their  attachment  to  their -civil 
and  religious  liberties ;  but  who  have  expended  not  much  less 
blood  and  treasure  in  violating-  the  rights  of  others,  than  in  de 
fending  their  own.  The  United  States  are  far  from  being  irre 
proachable  in  this  respect.  It  undoubtedly  is  very  inconsistent 
with  their  declarations  on  the  subject  of  human  rights  to  per 
mit  a  single  slave  to  be  found  within  their  jurisdiction,  and  we 
confess  the  justice  of  your  strictures  on  that  head. 

''Permit  us,  however,  to  observe,  that  although  consequences 
ought  not  to  deter  us  from  doing  what  is  right,  yet  that  it  is  Sfiot 
easy  to  persuade  men  in  general  to  act  on  that  magnanimous 
and  disinterested  principle.  It  is  well  known  that  errors,  either 
in  opinion  or  practice,  long  entertained  or  indulged,  are  diffi 
cult  to  eradicate,  and  particularly  so  when  they  have  become, 
as  it  were,  incorporated  in  the  civil  institutions  and  domestic 
economy  of  a  whole  people. 


HON.    WILLIAM  JAY.  87 

"Prior  to  the  late  revolution,  the  great  majority,  or  rather  the 
great  body  of  our  people,  had  been  so  long  accustomed  to  the 
practice  and  convenience  of  having  slaves,  that  very  few 
among  them  ever  doubted  the  propriety  and  rectitude  of  it. 
Some  liberal  and  conscientious  men  had,  indeed,  by  their  con 
duct  and  writings,  drawn  the  lawfulness  of  slavery  into  ques 
tion,  and  they  made  converts  to  that  opinion  ;  but  the  number 
of  those  converts  compared  with  the  people  at  large,  was  then 
very  inconsiderable.  Their  doctrines  prevailed  by  almost  in 
sensible  degrees,  and  was  like  the  little  lump  of  leaven  which 
was  put  into  three  measures  of  meal:  even  at  this  day,  the 
whole  mass  is  far  from  being  leavened,  though  we  have  good 
reason  to  hope  and  to  believe  that  if  the  natural  operations  of 
truth  are  constantly  watched  and  assisted,  but  NOT  forced  and 
precipitated,  the  end  we  ALL  aim  at  Vf'Al  finally  be  attained  in 
this  country. 

':  The  convention  who  formed  and  recommended  the  new 
constitution  had  an  arduous  task  to  perform,  especially  as  local 
interests,  and  in  some  measure  local  prejudices,  were  to  be 
accommodated.  Several  of  the  states  conceived  that  restraints 
on  slavery  might  be  too  rapid  to  consist  with  their  particular 
circumstances  ;  and  the  importance  of  union  rendered  it  neces 
sary  that  their  wishes  on  that  head  should,  in  some  degree,  be 
gratified. 

"  It  gives  us  pleasure  to  inform  you,  that  a  disposition  favour 
able  to  our  views  and  wishes  prevails  more  and  more,  and  that 
it  has  already  had  an  influence  on  our  laics.  When  it  is  con 
sidered  how  many  of  the  legislators  in  the  different  states  are 
proprietors  of  slaves,  and  what  opinions  and  prejudices  they 
have  imbibed  on  the  subject  from  their  infancy,  a  SUDDEN  AND 

TOTAL  STOP  TO  THIS  SPECIES  OF  OPPRESSION  IS  NOT  TO  BE  EXPECTED. 

"  We  will  cheerfully  co-operate  with  you  in  endeavouring  to 
procure  advocates  for  the  same  cause  in  other  countries,  and 
perfectly  approve  and  commend  your  establishing  a  correspon 
dence  in  France.  It  appears  to  have  produced  the  desired  effect ; 
for  Mons.  De  Warville,  the  secretary  of  a  society  for  the  like 
benevolent  purpose  at  Paris,  is  now  here ;  and  comes  instructed 
to  establish  a  correspondence  with  us,  and  to  collect  such  infor 
mation  as  may  promote  our  common  views.  He  delivered  to 


88  LETTERS   TO    THE 

our  society  an  extract  from  the  minutes  of  your  proceedings, 
dated  8th  of  April  last,  recommending  him  to  our  attention  ; 
and  upon  that  occasion  they  passed  the  resolutions  of  which  the 
enclosed  are  copies. 

"  We  are  much  obliged  by  the  pamphlets  enclosed  with  your 
letter,  and  shall  constantly  make  such  communications  to  you 
as  may  appear  to  us  interesting. 

"  By  a  report  of  the  committee  for  superintending  the  school 
we  have  established  in  this  city  for  the  education  of  negro  child 
ren,  we  find  that  proper  attention  is  paid  to  it,  and  that 
scholars  are  now  taught  in  it.  By  the  laws  of  this  state,  mas 
ters  may  now  liberate  healthy  slaves  of  a  proper  age  without 
giving  security  that  they  shall  not  become  a  parish  charge  ;  and 
the  exportation,  as  well  as  importation  of  them,  is  prohibited. 
The  state  has  also  manumitted  such  as  became  its  property  by 
confiscation ;  and  we  have  reason  to  expect  that  the  maxim, 
that  every  man,  of  whatever  colour,  is  to  be  presumed  t*  be 
free  until  the  contrary  be  shown,  will  prevail  in  our  courts  of 
justice.  Manumissions  daily  become  more  common  among  us  ; 
and  the  treatment  which  slaves  in  general  meet  with  in  this 
state  is  very  little  different  from  that  of  other  socities. 
"  I  have  the  honour  to  be,  gentlemen, 

"  Your  humble  servant, 
"  JOHN  JAY, 

"  President  of  the  Society  for  promoting  the  Manumission  of  Slaves" 

You  here  add, 

"  The  society  neither  expected  nor  attempted  to  effect  any 
sudden  alteration  in  the  laws  relating  to  slavery,  but  its  exer 
tions  were  chiefly  directed  to  the  protection  of  manumitted 
slaves,  and  to  the  education  of  coloured  children.  Mr.  Jay 
continued  at  the  head  of  the  society  until  he  became  chief  jus 
tice  of  the  United  States,  when,  thinking  it  possible  that  ques 
tions  might  be  brought  before  him  in  which  the  society  was  in 
terested,  he  deemed  it  proper  to  dissolve  his  official  connexion 
with  it." 

With  this  exhibition  of  the  contrariety  of  views  between 
father  and  son,  and  between  your  own  views  in  1833  and  in 
1835,  I  submit  to  the  reader  the  decision,  which  is  entitled  to 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  89 

the  greater  confidence, — the  late  John  Jay,  chief  justice  in  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  or — William  Jay,  associ 
ate  judge  of  Westchester  County  Court ! 

And  as  you  have  yourself  furnished  the  public  with  the  mir 
ror  which  reflects  this  exhibition  of  yourself,  you  cannot  justly 
complain  that  I  have  "  held  it  up  to  nature." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


90  LETTERS   TO   THE 


LETTER  XII. 

SIR, 

IN  the  abstract  you  have  given  of  the  "laws  relating  to 
slavery,"  in  the  several  states,  you  have  not  only  falsely  attri 
buted  those  laws  to  the  Colonization'  Society,  or  its  influence, 
but  after  a  "  picture  of  American  slavery"  as  seen  in  these 
laws,  you  say  : — 

"  This  is  the  system  which  the  Colonization  Society  excuses, 
and  which  it  CONTENDS  ought  to  be  perpetual,  rather  than  its 
victims  should  enjoy  their  rights  in  'the  white  man's  land.'" 

And  here  is  another  specimen  of  the  reckless  dogmatism 
with  which  you  assail  the  victim  of  your  wrath.  I  have  already 
shown,  that  the  Colonization  Society  does  not  excuse  the  sys 
tem,  in  any  sense  in  which  John  Jay  does  not  excuse  it,  and 
you  will  not  now  persist  in  the  latter  allegation,  for  I  am  per 
suaded  that  you  had  forgotten  your  own  testimony  on  that  sub 
ject.  But  when  or  where  does  the  Colonization  Society  con 
tend  that  the  system  ought  to  be  perpetual,  or  when  did  that 
society  call  this  "  the  white  man's  land."  You  must  know 
upon  reflection,  that  these  charges  have  no  foundation  but  in 
your  own  imagination,  and  even  the  authority  of  your  name 
will  fail  in  gaining  them  confidence  in  any  community. 

The  description  you  give  of  the  "  principles  and  designs  of 
the  abolitionists,"  would  perhaps  gain  credence,  but  for  the  sin 
gle  fact,  that  they  have  avowed  "principles  and  designs"  essen 
tially  different  in  their  own  publications,  and  the  public  there 
fore  cannot  receive  your  testimony  on  that  subject,  while  your 
"  want  of  information"  is  so  apparent.  And  here  you  cannot 
object  to  the  application  of  the  lex  talionis,  and  therefore  I  in 
vite  your  attention  to  the  evidence  furnished  by  the  official  pub* 
lications  of  the  American  Anti-slavery  Society,  holding  that  soci 
ety  responsible  only  for  such,  though  I  might  justly  insist  upon 
all  the  abominable  sentiments  which  from  time  to  time  have 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  91 

disgraced  the  columns  of  the  Liberator,  Emancipator,  Evange 
list,  et  id  omne  genus. 

Now  you  represent  these  innocent  abolitionists  as  only  affirm 
ing  that  slavery  is  sinful,  to  which  you  know  the  Colonization 
Society  virtually  subscribe,  when  they  call  it  a  "  moral  evil," 
and  John  Jay,  when  he  calls  it  an  "  error."  But  what  says 
their  constitution. 

"  Slaveholding  (not  slavery)  is  a  heinous  crime  in  the  sight 
of  God,"  And  instead  of  "  arguments  addressed  to  the  under 
standings  and  consciences  of  their  fellow  citizens,  to  convince 
them  of  the  duty  and  policy  of  immediate  emancipation,"  as 
you  say  on  p.  136,  the  constitution  proves,  that  it  is  to  convict 
them  of  this  "  heinous  crime,"  that  these  arguments  are  used. 
See  article  ii. 

But  again  you  say,  "  the  MEANS  by  which  the  society  will  en 
deavour  to  secure  to  the  blacks,  an  equality  of  civil  and  reli 
gious  privileges,  are  frankly  avowed  to  be,  the  encouragement 
of  their  intellectual,  moral,  and  religious  improvement,  and 
the  removal  of  existing  prejudices  against  them."  But  what 
are  the  means  which  their  first  annual  report  proposes  for  this 
object '?  Let  us  see. 

"  Let  some  of  our  higher  institutions  of  learning  trample  on 
the  cord  of  caste  !  and  open  their  doors  to  all,  without  distinc 
tion  of  complexion  !" 

"  Let  it  be  the  glory  of  our  sons  and  daughters,  to  have  been 
educated  in  seminaries  which  were  open  to  worthy  applicants, 
without  regard  to  complexion  !" 

But  you  seem  to  have  forgotten  the  means*  which  are  em- 

*  Among  the  MEANS  used  by  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  and  its 
friends,  for  the  promotion  of  their  objects,  is  their  proposed  exclusion 
of  Christian  Ministers  from  their  pulpits,  and  the  like  exclusion  of 
Christian  professors  from  the  ordinances  of  the  Lord's  house,  by  making 
slaveholding  a  test  of  communion,  in  the  northern  churches.  This 
unscriptural  measure  is  not  only  advocated  in  the  anti-slavery  press, 
but  has  been  actually  introduced  into  several  of  the  professed  churches 
of  Christ  in  the  City  of  New- York,  and  elsewhere,  and  is  strenu 
ously  recommended  to  the  adoption  of  all  the  churches  in  the  non- 
slaveholding  states. 

By  such  means,  it  is  expected  to  alienate  ministers  from  the  people 
of  their  charge,  distract  and  divide  churches,  alienate  the  affection 
and  confidence  of  northern  from  southern  Christians^  and  thus,  to 


92  LETTERS  TO  THE 

ployed  throughout  your  book,  and  in  which  all  the  funds  of 
your  society,  and  all  the  eloquence  of  your  agents,  have  been 
expended.  The  whole  army  of  immediate  abolitionists  have 
adopted,  as  their  motto,  the  title  of  Mr.  Cropper's  book,  "  TJie 
extinction  of  the,  American  Colonization  Society,  the  first 
step  toward  the  abolition  of  slavery"  This  is  the  MEANS  on 
which  you  all  build  your  hopes,  and  to  which  you  concentrate 
your  efforts,  and  yet  you  have  entirely  overlooked  the  "  over 
throw  of  the  colonization  delusion,"  in  your  exposition  of  the 
means  used  for  the  attainment  of  the  objects  of  abolitionists. 
On  page  90  of  your  own  book,  you  inadvertently  avow  this 
as  the  principal  means,  for  you  call  upon  abolitionists  to  meet 
the  Colonization  Society  with  "  unrelenting  hostility,  and  to 
labour  without  rest,  and  without  weariness,  for  its  entir e  pros 
tration  ;"  and  yet,  on  page  136,  you  have  forgotten  all  this,  and 
in  a  "frank  avowal"  of  the  means  used  by  the  society,  and  of 
their  principles  and  designs,  you  carefully  omit  to  mentiqn  it 
Is  this  "  principle,  or  expediency  ?" 

But  suffer  me  now,  to  examine  a  few  of  the  "  ARGUMENTS  ad 
dressed  to  the  understandings  and  consciences  of  slavehold 
ers,"  by  the  Anti-Slavery  Society. 

"  The  truth  is,  and  it  must  be  suppressed  no  longer,  we  have 
been  hired  to  abet  oppression,  to  be  the  tools  of  tyrants — to  look 
on  coolly,  while  2,000,000  of  our  brethren  have  been  stripped 
of  every  right,  and  worse  than  murdered!" — 1st  Annual  Re 
port. 

"  The  man  who  seizes  another  in  New-York,  and  drags  him 
into  bondage,  (alluding  to  the  legal  arrest  of  a  fugitive  slave, 
under  the  constitution  of  the  United  States,)  whatever  laws  he 

use  the  language  of  George  Thompson,  the  British  agent  of  the  Ame 
rican  Anti-Slavery  Society,  who  is  now  propagating  his  creed  of  po 
litical  ar>d  religious  nullification  through  the  northern  and  eastern 
states,  "  to  split  the  great  Methodist  prop,"  and  "  the  great  Presbyte 
rian  prop,"  to  which,  he  says,  "granite  is  nothing  !"  and  the  "great 
Baptist  prop,"  &c.  which,  he  says,  unitedly  support  slavery  in  the 
United  States.  This  is  one  of  the  means  which  Mr.  Jay  must  in 
clude  in  those  "frankly  avowed,"  and  he  will  scarcely  persuade  *lhe 
reader  to  believe,  that  Mr.  Frelinghuysen  was  in  error,  when  he  said, 
they  "  seek  to  destroy  our  happy  union,"  by  all  his  declamation,  or 
sophistry  either. 


HON.    WILLIAM  JAY.  93 

may  have  in  his  favour,  is  to  be  regarded  as  a  ROBBER  AND  PI 
RATE  !" — 1st  Annual  Report. 

"  Slaveholding  is  piracy,  equally  atrocious  with  slave-trading ; 
and  if  there  is  any  difference  in  criminality,  slaveholding  is  the 
WORST  OF  THE  TWO  !" — Speech  of  Mr.  Phelps. 

"  The  slave  states  are  Sodoms,  and  almost  every  village 
family  a  brothel!"— Speech  of  Mr.  Thome. 

"  Jesus  Christ  was  a  coloured  man  /" — Sermon  of  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Cox. 

"  Suppose  the  constitution  did  sanction  slavery  ?  What 
then  ?  While  there  is  a  God  in  heaven,  can  we  be  bound  by 
any  compacts  of  our  own,  or  any  ENACTMENTS  of  our  fellow 
worms,  to  sin  against  Him  ?" — Speech  of  Rev.  Mr.  May. 

The  following  arguments  !  are  from  the  "  Declaration  of  the 
Anti-Slavery  Convention." 

"  The  guilt  of  this  nation  is  unequalled  by  any  other  on  the 
face  of  the  earth." 

"  Every  American  citizen,  who  retains  a  human  being  in  in 
voluntary  bondage,  is  (according  to  scripture)  a  man  stealer  /"* 

"All  those  LAWS  which  are  now  in  force,  admitting  the  right 
of  slavery,  are,  before  God,  NULL  AND  VOID." 

And  now  look  at  the  "  arguments"  of  that  "much  calum 
niated"  individual,  as  you  call  him,  Mr.  Garrison,  "  to  the  un 
derstanding  and  conscience  /" 

"  The  Colonization  Society  is  a  creature  without  brains, 
eyeless,  unnatural,  hypocritical,  relentless,  unjust." 

"  Ye  crafty  calculators !  ye  hard  hearted,  incorrigible  sin 
ners  !  ye  greedy  and  relentless  robbers !  ye  contemners  oj 
justice  and  mercy  I  ye  trembling,  pitiful,  pale-faced  usurpers! 
my  soul  spurns  you  with  unspeakable  disgust  /" 

What  a  specimen  of  "  great  moral  principles,  frankly  and 
unequivocally  avowed  !"  and  how  powerful  must  be  the  effect 
of  such  "  arguments"  as  these,  "  upon  the  understanding  and 
conscience  !"  And  yet,  "  such  are  the  principles  and  designs  of 
those  who  are  now  designated  as  abolitionists,"  who,  you  say, 
suffer  "unmerited  and  unmeasured  reproach." 

After  the  reader  has  perused  the  foregoing  extracts,  he  will 

*  duery  7  Was  John  Jay  a  "  man  stealer,"  while  president  of  the 
Manumission  Society  7 


94  LETTERS  TO  THE 

be  surprised,  that  you  should  have  written  an  entire  chapter,  to 
prove  that  the  immediate  abolitionists  are  not  "  fanatics."  I 
should  not,  sir,  require  any  testimony,  other  than  that  contained 
in  your  own  book,  to  convict  you,  and  all  the  anti-slavery  par 
ty,  of  fanaticism,  before  any  candid  and  intelligent  jury.  It  is 
the  purest  fanaticism  that  was  ever  exhibited  in  the  history  of 
our  race.  It  blinds  the  eyes,  perverts  the  intellect,  destroys  the 
memory,  blunts  the  moral  sense,  hardens  the  heart,  sears  the 
conscience,  annihilates  the  religion  of  its  votaries,  and  practi 
cally  teaches,  that  while  "  slaveholding  is  a  heinous  crime," 
"bearing  false  witness"  is  no  crime  at  all!  If  this  be  not  fana 
ticism,  and  of  all  this,  your  book  affords  melancholy  demonstra 
tion,  then  I  know  not  where  it  is  to  be  found. 

In  your  attempted  vindication  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society 
from  the  charge  of  being  " incendiaries  and  traitors"  you 
quote  from  Jefferson,  Jay,  and  Franklin,  while  you  must  know, 
that  each  of  the  sentiments,  imputed  to  them,  were  expressed 
in  favour  of  "gradual  abolition,"  and'  though  you  lay  great 
stress  upon  them,  they  are  entirely  irrelevant.  When,  there 
fore,  you  attempt  to  show  contrariety  between  those  gentlemen, 
and  Messrs.  T.  Frelinghuysen,  Chancellor  Walworth,  and  Da  • 
vid  B.  Ogden,  Esq.,  you  grievously  misrepresent  them.  The 
proof  of  the  charges,  made  by  the  three  gentlemen  last  named, 
will  be  found  in  the  preceding  extracts  from  anti-slavery  publi 
cations.  Mr.  Frelinghuysen  justly  accuses  the  immediate  abo 
litionists  of  "  seeking  to  destroy  our  happy  union  j" — Chancel 
lor  Walworth  charges  upon  them,  "  contemplating  a  viola 
tion  of  the  rights  of  property,  secured  by  the  constitution  they 
have  sworn  to  support ;  and  of  pursuing  measures  which  would 
lead  to  a  civil  war ;"  and  David  B.  Ogden,  Esq.,  declares  your 
doctrine  of  "  immediate  emancipation  to  be  direct  and  palpable 
nullification."  These  men  are  your  accusers,  and  you  admit 
one  of  them  to  be  "deservedly  distinguished  for  his  piety,  JLSL- 
lents,  and  station  ;"  another,  to  be  one  of  our  "  most  estimable 
citizens ;"  and  the  third,  to  be  "  a  gentleman  whose  legal  emi 
nence,  and  purity  of  character,  justly  give  to  his  opinions  pV 
culiar  weight ;"  and  yet  you  hope  to  gainsay  such  evidence,  by 
the  bare  assertion,  that  they  make  "  charges  unsupported  by  a 
particle  of  testimony  /" 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  95 

Surely  your  abolitionism  has  placed  you,  sir,  in  an  unenviable 
predicament,  when  you  are  constrained,  in  self-vindication,  to 
hold  up  such  men  as  these  are,  by  your  own  showing,  to  the  in 
dignation  of  your  fellow  citizens  and  fellow  Christians.  And 
ought  you  not  to  "  pause,  to  ponder,  and  to  pray,"  lest,  haply, 
you  be  yourself  withering  beneath  that  very  fanaticism  which 
you  so  earnestly  disclaim  ?  Surely,  however  you  may  repel 
the  charge  of  political  nullification,  you  furnish  palpable  evi 
dence,  that  your  creed  nullifies  the  courtesies  of  good  fellow 
ship  and  Christian  comity ;  and  I  cannot  but  regret,  that  "  a 
man,  possessing  the  power  to  do  so  much  good,  should,  fron* 
'  want  of  information,'  so  grievously  misapply  it." 
With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &c. 


96  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  XIII. 

SIR, 

YOUR  chapter  on  the  subject  of  "  Slavery  under  the  Authority 
of  Congress,"  next  claims  my  attention.  And  as  slavery  in 
the  District  of  Columbia  is  a  subject  almost  annually  calling 
forth  rebuke  and  remonstrance  from  various  parts  of  the  union, 
and  as  so  large  a  portion  of  the  public  press  has  been  for  many 
years  occupied  with  appeals  to  congress  for  its  abolition  in  the 
district,  you  might  have  spared  yourself  the  details  you  furnish 
touching  this  department  of  the  subject,  if  you  had  not  designed 
to  add  another  to  your  series  of  unfounded  aspersions  of  the 
Colonization  Society,  this  unfortunate  victim  of  your  relentless 
hostility. 

Year  after  year  have  the  leading  members  and  friends  of  the 
Colonization  Society  memorialized  congress  to  abolish  slavery 
and  the  domestic  slave-trade  at  the  seat  of  the  Federal  Govern 
ment,  and  those  who  have  watched  the  gradual  improvement  in 
the  temper  with  which  such  memorials  have  been  viewed  at 
Washington,  cannot  have  failed  to  perceive  that  until  two  or 
three  years  past,  the  aspect  of  this  interesting  and  important 
subject  has  been  brightening,  and,  as  is  believed  by  many  friends 
in  both  houses,  had  the  subject  continued  to  be  brought  before 
our  national  legislature,  unconnected  with  any  violent  or  offen 
sive  attitude  on  the  part  of  the  memorialists,  by  this  time,  the 
result  so  desirable  for  the  character  of  the  nation,  and  so  dear 
to  the  friends  of  humanity,  might  probably  have  been  attained. 
But,  alas !  in  our  evil  day,  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society 
has  most  indiscreetly  taken  this  subject  out  of  other  and  better 
hands,  and,  after  having  laboured  to  agitate  the  country  by  vio 
lent  denunciation,  and  created  among  the  wisest  of  our  states 
men  apprehensions  of  a  dissolution  of  the  union,  by  arraying, 
so  far  as  in  them  lies,  the  north  against  the  south,  and  thus 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  97 

rousing  prejudices  and  distrust  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  so 
circumstanced,  that  they  are  morbidly  sensitive  when  the  sub 
ject  of  slavery  is  touched  in  congress,  this  society  has  taken  a 
prominent  part  in  presenting  the  late  memorial. 

Under  such  circumstances,  it  was  hardly  to  be  expected  that 
the  petition  would  have  been  disposed  of  by  quietly  laying  it 
on  the  table,  and  the  fact  that  this  course  was  taken,  is  an  evi 
dence  of  the  forbearance  of  those  who  felt  keenly  in  reference 
to  the  participation,  by  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  in  getting  up 
the  petition.  This  society  having  rendered  themselves  obnox 
ious  to  a  large  portion  of  the  members  of  the  national  legisla 
ture,  by  the  character  of  their  publications,  in  becoming  peti 
tioners  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  district,  they  give  to 
that  important  and  desirable  object  the  character  of  a  party 
measure,  and,  by  consequence,  alienate  those  who  would  other 
wise  favour  it.  And  I  have  reason  to  know  by  personal  inter 
course  and  correspondence  with  members  of  both  houses,  that 
the  friends  and  devoted  advocates  of  the  object,  despair  of  suc 
cess  in  its  attainment,  so  long  as  the  Anti-Slavery  Society  are 
among  its  prominent  supporters.  In  truth,  sir,  there  can  be  little 
doubt  that  the  feeling  excited  by  immediate  abolitionists 
will  for  many  years  delay,  if  it  do  not  utterly  prevent,  the  suc 
cess  of  any  future  memorial.  And  if  you,  sir.  desire  to 
see  the  day  when  slavery  shall  no  longer  disgrace  the  District 
of  Columbia,  let  the  influence  you  have  acquired  with  the  party 
by  becoming  their  apologist  be  exerted  to  induce  them  to  abstain 
from  all  interference  with  the  subject,  since  such  interference 
on  their  part  will  be  mischievous  if  not  fatal  to  the  object. 

But  although  this  measure  has  long  interested  the  hearts  and 
called  forth  the  efforts  of  colonizationists  in  various  parts  of  the 
country,  before  the  anti-slavery  party  had  awakened  from  their 
slumbers,  yet  you  say  that  you  "appeal  in  vain  to  the  benevo 
lence  of  the  Colonization  Society  ?"  And  this  too  in  the  same 
paragraph  in  which  you  say  that  "  no  power  on  earth  but  con 
gress  can  remedy  the  evil !"  And  yet  it  seems  you  blame  the 
Colonization  Society  for  the  legislation  of  congress,  as  well 
as  that  of  the  states.  Let  me  once  more  tel]  you  that  the  Colo 
nization  Society,  as  such,  has  no  authority  to  interfere  in  the 
..ubjectj  although  its  members  may  and  do  express  their  opi- 
10 


98  LETTERS  TO  THE 

nions,  and  exert  their  influence  individually  to  rouse  congress 
to  action  on  the  subject  of  slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia, 
and  the  late  memorial  will  demonstrate  that  a  large  proportion 
of  the  signers  were  colonizationists,  who  did  not  withhold  their 
names  from  the  agents  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  though 
they  feared  the  effect  of  that  party  upon  the  object. 

You  need  not  then  have  vindicated  your  associates  from  the 
charge  of  "  wild  fanaticism,"  or  pretend  that  they  have  been 
branded  as  "traitors  and  milliners"  for  having  endeavoured  to 
influence  congress  on  this  subject,  for  your  own  book  furnishes 
evidence  that  the  Pennsylvania  and  New-York  Legislatures 
have  exercised  the  same  right,  and  it  is  one  against  which  there 
is,  there  can  be,  no  objection,  and  hence  all  you  have  said  on 
this  subject  is  perfectly  idle.  Thousands  of  colonizationists 
are  ready  to  unite  with  you  in  labouring  to  promote  the  aboli 
tion  of  slavery  in  the  district,  if  this  were  your  "  single  object," 
and  it  would  be  sufficient  to  call  forth  all  your  energies  anjj  all 
your  patience  too.  The  cruelties  and  abominations  of  the 
"  licensed  traffic  in  human  flesh,"  which  you  depict  in  strong 
language,  as  existing  under  the  shade  of  the  Capitol,  and  the 
reprobation  of  this  disgrace  to  our  common  country,  I  feel  to 
be  called  for,  nor  do  I  believe  that  the  members  of  the  Coloni  • 
zation  Society  generally  feel  less,  or  are  prepared  to  do  less  fol 
its  extinction,  than  yourself  or  your  associates.  On  this  subjec, 
we  only  differ  as  to  the  means  likely  to  produce  the  end.  . 
would  continue  to  expose  its  enormities,  and  appeal  to  the  na 
tional  legislature  by  annual  petitions,  nor  would  I  cease  to  urg< 
the  importance  of  the  subject  until  congress  should  be  gradu 
ally  prepared  for  a  gradual  system  of  abolition,  like  that  of  New 
York,  which  was  produced  in  this  very  way,  and  has  results 
in  the  honour  and  freedom  of  the  empire  state.  But  I  woul: 
deprecate  all  rash  declamation  and  intemperate  haste,  as  inex 
pedient  and  mischievous,  calculated  to  retard  if  not  totally  de 
feat  the  object  proposed.  Suaviter  in  modo,  fortiter  in  re,  '• 
the  motto  which  ought  ever  to  be  present  in  such  an  underta 
king,  and  must  be  regarded  in  order  to  success.  ^, 

But  your  next  chapter  on  Slavery  under  State  Authority,  con 
tains  a  defence  of  the  society  against  the  charge  of  "  wishin 
congress  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  states."  The  disclaimer  o 


HON.   WILLIAM  JAY.  99 

this  wish  was  hardly  called  for,  much  less  the  specious  argu 
ment  you  have  attempted,  for  I  never  recollect  seeing  it  insinu 
ated  until  I  found  it  in  your  book.  And  yet  you  quote  from  the 
Hon.  Daniel  Webster,  a  certificate  that  he  "  does  not  know  any 
persons,  and  is  sure  there  are  very  few,  who  suppose  that  con 
gress  has  any  power  over  the  states  on  the  subject  of  slavery." 
Surely  this  is  but  a  testimony  to  the  intelligence  of  the  north, 
which  was  rendered  necessary  only  by  the  impeachment  of 
their  understanding,  which  Mr.  W.  repels.  But  you  must  not 
expect,  sir,  that  your  readers  can  be  induced  by  a  disclaimer  of 
.nis  creature  of  your  own  imagination,  to  acquit  the  Anti-Sla 
very  Society  of  nullification,  of  which  Mr.  Ogden  justly  ac 
cuses  it,  and  for  which  you  load  him  with  obloquy.  You  were 
ever  charged  with  wishing  congress  to  nullify  the  state  laws, 
nd  your  quotations  from  the  reports  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Soci 
ety  to  disprove  this  are  entirely  uncalled  for.  You  are  charged 
with  being  yourselves  nullifiers,  without  the  aid  of  congress, 
and  I  respectfully  invite  your  attention  to  the  proof.  The  fol- 
.  owing  quotation  from  the  official  anti-slavery  declaration  is 
irrefragable  evidence. 

"  All  those  LAWS  which  are  now  in  force,  admitting  the  right 
rf  slavery,  are  therefore,  before  God,  utterly  NULL  and  void  /" 
Here,  I  humbly  submit,  is  a  "  solemn  declaration,"  with  "  all 
«he  pomp  and  circumstance"  which  a  convention  could  give  it, 
of  palpable  and  overt  nullification!  It  is  both  political  and 
moral  nullification.  Suppose  any  body  of  men  were  to  orga 
nize  in  a  similar  manner,  and  issue  a  "  declaration,"  that  "  all 
those  laws  which  are  now  in  force,  admitting  the  right  [of 
liberty  of  speech  and  of  the  press^  are  before  God  utterly  null 
and  void"  would  you  hesitate  to  call  such  a  body  of  men 
conspirators  against  the  liberty  of  this  nation,  or  to  denounce  the 
authors  of  such  an  act  as  nullifiers  ?  And  suppose  they  were 
to  defend  themselves,  by  saying,  that  they  never  "  wished 
congress  to  interfere  with  the  states !"  would  this  be  regarded 
in  any  -other  light  than  adding  insult  to  injury?  The  parallel 
K  clear,  the  analogy  perfect. 

But  any.her  instance  of  nullification  contemplated  by  the  so 
ciety,  and  to  effect  which  they  do  solicit  the  interference  of 


100  LETTERS  TO  THE 

congress,  notwithstanding  your  disclaimer,  and  authorities,  is 
contained  in  this  "  famous  declaration,"  as  follows : 

"  We  maintain  that  CONGRESS  has  a  right,  and  is  SOLEMNL  ' 
BOUND,  to  suppress  the  domestic  slave-trade  between  the  several 
states  /" 

Now  compare  this  with  the  several  quotations  you  give  C 
prove  that  the  Anti-Slavery  Society  would  deprecate  the  "inter 
ference  of  congress  on  the  subject  of  slavery  as  a  violation  o 
the  national  compact."  Is  it  no  "  interference  with  the  slav 
states  in  relation  to  slavery  "  to  "  suppress  the  domestic  slave 
trade  between  the  several  states,"  which  the  society  declare 
congress  not  only  to  have  a  right  to  do,  but  to  be  "  solemnly  bound' 
"  to  exercise  it."  Friend  Hubbard  and  Mr.  Gurley,  then,  have 
some  reason  to  say  abolitionists  are  endeavouring  to  "  cause 
the  national  legislation  to  bear  directly  on  the  slaveholders,5' 
and  in  "  a  great  degree  against  and  in  defiance  of  ike  will  of 
the  south."  If  you  have  never  before  "  seen  an  attempj  to 
prove  it,"  you  will  please  consider  this  a  feeble  one,  and  which, 
if  I  thought  it  needful,  I  might  strengthen  by  still  further  quo 
tations.  I  think,  however,  you  will  find  it  difficult  to  evade  the 
force  of  those  here  presented,  and  it  is  clear,  that  "  Chancellor 
Walworth,  and  his  two  associates,"  have  some  foundation  for 
the  opinions  against  which  you  so  earnestly  protest. 

After  having  abjured  the  sentiments  attributed  to  your,  so 
ciety,  to  which  I  have  just  alluded,  you  "  next  attempt  a 
justification  of  the  anti-slavery  efforts  made  exclusively  at  tht 
North  where  there  are  no  slaves."  And  here  you  have  the  fol 
lowing  extraordinary  sentiment. 

"  If  it  could  be  foreseen,  that  no  slave  in  any  of  the  states, 
would  ever  be  liberated  through  the  influence  of  northern  anti- 
slavery  societies,  there  would  still  remain  great  and  glorious 
objects  to  stimulate  their  zeal,  to  employ  all  their  energies, 
and  abundantly  to  reward  I  all  their  labours." 

So,  then,  the  labours  of  the  American  ANTI-SLAVERY  So 
ciety,  and  all  its  auxiliaries,  may  be  "abundantly  rewarded,"  ii 
"  NO  SLAVE  should  ever  be  liberated!"    This  provokes  a  sm.ta; 
2,245, 144  slaves,  "compelled  to  live  without  God,  andtodiew.th 
out  hope,"  and  yet  a  society,  professing  to  be  anti-slavery,  and 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY  1 0 

naving  a  "  single  object,"  the  "  entire  abolition  of  slavery,"  "  im 
mediate  abolition,  without  expatriation  !"  and  yet  we  are  told, 
.n  the  first  year  of  its  existence,  that  all  its  labours  would  be 
abundantly  rewarded,  though  "  no  slave  in  any  of  the  states 
.hall  ever  be  liberated!"  Surely  this  "powerful  institution," 
.vould  be  "  very  thankful  for  small  favours  !"  Truly,  I  have 
always  been  persuaded,  that  the  "  frank  avowal"  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  American  Anti-Slavery  Society  did  not  ex 
press  its  real  object,  nor  could  I  convince  myself,  that  if  they 
were  only  anti-slavery  they  would  have  laboured  so  long  with 
out  having  liberated  a  single  slave.  But,  I  confess,  sir,  that  I 
vvas  scarcely  prepared  for  this  "  frank  avowal,"  though  the  fact 
does  not  surprise  me,  yet  I  fear  you  have  disclosed  it  rather  in 
discreetly,  and  I  should  not  marvel  if  it  were  to  call  forth 
another  "  disclaimer." 

The  reader  need  not  be  surprised  at  this  strange  inconsis 
tency,  for  although  called  "  Anti-Slavery,"  and  its  object  being 
"  immediate  abolition,"  yet  it  will  be  abundantly  rewarded, 
though  no  slave  be  liberated,  as  we  learn  by  this  paragraph,  if 
it  shall  only  succeed  in  the  great  and  glorious  object,  employ 
ing  all  its  energies,  that  of  counteracting  "  the  baneful  influ 
ence  of  the  Colonization  Society  at  the  north  !"  And  the 
u  Black  Act  of  Connecticut,"  together  with  "Judge  Dagget's  de 
cision,"  are  here  referred  to  as  being  the  subjects,  the  "  imme 
diate  abolition"  of  which  will  abundantly  reward  the  anti- 
slavery  society,  "  if  no  slave  in  any  of  the  states  be  liberated 
through  its  influence  /"  You  ha.ve  elsewhere  declared  "  un 
relenting  hostility  to  the  Colonization  Society,"  and  instructed 
your  associates  in  the  duty  of  labouring,  "  without  weariness, 
and  without  rest,  for  its  entire  prostration."  But  I  did  not 
expect  that  you  would  have  the  "  moral  courage"  to  avow  that 
this  is  your  chief,  if  not  your  only  object,  and  that  the  Anti- 
Slavery  Society  is  only  an  Anti-Colonization  Society,  and  may 
receive  an  abundant  reward,  without  liberating  a  single  slave. 

What  then  are  we  to  think  of  the  moving  appeals  you  have 
made  to  heaven  and  earth,  in  behalf  of  the  millions  of  slaves 
who  are  all "  living  without  God,  and  dying  without  hope,"  while 
you  are  abundantly  rewarded,  without  giving  freedom  to  one 
of  them,  if  you  can  only  "  prostrate"  the  Colonization  Society ! 
10* 


102  LETTERS    TO    THE 

Let  me  assure  you,  sir,  that  the  members  of  the  Colonization 
Society,  though  they  may  regard  the  extinction  of  the  Ameri 
can  Anti-Slavery  Society,  as  a  "  consummation  devoutly  to  be 
wished,"  for  the  sake  of  the  interests  of  humanity  and  religion, 
and.  the  regeneration  of  Africa  ;  yet  no  one  among  them  would 
be  "  abundantly  rewarded,"  if  no  slave  in  any  of  the  states 
should  be  liberated  through  their  influence.  Nay,  verily,  such 
are  our  convictions  of  the  evil  of  slavery,  and  the  duty  of  pro 
moting  its  abolition,  that  I  but  speak  the  sentiments  of  tens  of 
thousands,,  whom  you  vilify  as  colonizationists,  when  I  say,  that 
we  view  the  system  of  slavery  with  "  unrelenting  hostility," 
and  mean  to  "  labour  without  weariness,  and  without  rest,  for 
its  gradual  and  entire  abolition."  This  is  our  anti-slavery  creed, 
and  we  will  never  be  abundantly  rewarded,  while  within  our 
country,  or  on  any  other  spot  of  earth,  there  lives  a  fellow  man 
who  calls  his  brother  slave  !  You,  then,  and  those  who  think 
with  you,  are  not  "  anti-slavery  enough"  for  me,  and  from  s^uch 
I  turn  away,  nor  would  I  own  as  a  colonizationist  any  profess 
ed  friend  of  the  African  race,  who  would  consider  himself 
"  abundantly  rewarded,"  or  satisfied  in  any  respect,  while  a 
single  slave  remains  in  involuntary  bondage.  And  although 
the  Colonization  Society,  as  such,  cannot  interfere,  and  ought 
not,  to  exert  any  direct  action  upon  the  subject,  because  con 
trary  to  the  letter  of  its  constitution,  yet  the  moral  influence 
its  success  exerts  in  favour  of  voluntary  abolition,  is  mighty"  in 
its  operation,  and  successful  in  its  results. 

It  is  amazing,  sir,  to  your  best  friends,  to  discover  the  un 
happy  evidences  of  the  infatuation  of  your  mind,  when  you 
could  write  such  sentences  as  the  following,  and  what  is  super 
latively  ludicrous,  persuade  yourself  that  these  are  the  fruits  of 
northern  abolitionism. 

"  The  consciences  of  southern  Christians  so  long  lulled  by  the 
opiate  of  colonization,  are  AWAKENING  to  duty.  Southern 
divines  are  beginning  to  acknowledge  the  sinfulness  of  slavery, 
and  recent  slaveholders  are  now  proclaiming  the  safety  and 
duty  of  immediate  emancipation.  The  whole  nation  has  befen 
roused  from  its  lethargy,  and  in  almost  every  circle  and  neigh 
bourhood,  the  subject  of  abolition  is  attracting  attention ;  the 
violence  and  persecution  experienced  by  abolitionists  instead  of 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  103 

suppressing,  has  promoted  discussion,  and  they  have  reason  to 
hope,  that  slavery  will  ultimately  be  abolished,  by  the  volun 
tary  action  of  the  south,  in  compliance  with  the  dictates  of 
policy  and  duty !" 

What  a  mighty  moral  engine  is  colonization  !  How  wonder 
ful  that  this  powerful  opiate  should  "  lull  the  consciences  of 
southern  Christians  and  northern  divines,"  and  throw  this 
"  whole  nation  into  the  profoundest  lethargy"  But  how  in 
finitely  more  mighty,  is  your  anti-slavery  antidote  !  Already 
Christians,  divines,  and  the  whole  nation,  are  "awakening" 
from  their  "  lethargy,"  and  "  beginning"  to  live  !  Had  you 
found  it  convenient  to  furnish  some  instances,  or  even  a  single 
example,  produced  by  abolitionism  in  proof  of  this  ridiculous 
conceit,  in  the  shape  of  a  liberated  slave,  colonizationists  them 
selves  would  rejoice  with  you.  But  alas  !  in  the  absence  of 
such  proof,  you  content  yourself  and  immediate  abolitionists, 
with  hoping  that  "  slavery  will  be  ULTIMATELY  abolished  by  the 
voluntary  action  of  the  south,"  in  the  precise  language  and  spirit 
of  colonizationists  from  the  beginning,  and  in  the  strongest  pos 
sible  terms  you  abandon  immediateism,  for  gradualism,  and 
only  hope  for  voluntary  abolition,  and  this  ultimately  !  I  will 
only  add,  that  this  hope  needed  not  the  Anti-Slavery  Society, 
for  in  this  hope  colonizationism  "  lives,  moves,  and  has  its 
being." 

With  due  respect, 

Yours,  &o. 


104  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  XIV. 

SIR, 

YOUR  next  chapter,  is  on  "the  Safety  of  Immediate  Emanci 
pation,"  which  you  admit  that  "  many  may  conscientiously 
doubt."  Whether  such  will  have  their  doubts  removed  by  any 
thing  you  have  written,  is  even  more  than  doubtful,  for  in  no 
part  of  your  volume  do  you  exhibit  more  deplorable  evidence  of 
"  want  of  information,"  nor  do  you  elsewhere  furnish  greater 
examples  of  illogical  and  sophistical  reasoning. 

In  all  the  Jive  cases  of  "  immediate  emancipation,"  to  which 
you  appeal  in  proof  of  its  safety,  there  was  no  semblance  of  jm- 
mediateism  in  the  case,  except  in  the  single  instance  ol 
Mexico.*  In  Chili,  Buenos  Ayres,  Colombia,  and  New-York 
every  body  knows  that  abolition  was  gradually  effected,  and 
yet  they  are  all  cited  as  instances  of  "  sudden  abolition,"  aDd 
as  "  facts"  supporting  your  "  theory."  Indeed  you  seem  to  feel 

*  In  this  reference  to  Mexico,  Mr.  Jay  is  convicted  of  a  most  calam 
itous  "  want  of  information,"  or  rather  inaccuracy  of  information 
He  says  that  "  the  government  of  Mexico  granted  instantaneous  and 
unconditional  emancipation  to  every  slave,"  and  on  page  190  he  tells 
us  that  "  Mexico  abolished  slavery,  without  compensating  the  masters.  ' 
He  will  excuse  me  for  "dispelling  his  ignorance"  in  relation  to 
Mexico,  as  he  proposes  kindly  to  do  for  others,  in  the  case  of  St.  Do 
mingo. 

The  facts  of  the  case  in  Mexico,  are  exactly  the  reverse,  and  as  his 
reference  to  it  is  unfortunate,  so  also  his  reasoning  on  it  is  fallacious, 
The  slaves  in  Mexico  were  "  all  declared  free  at  once,  but  were  con- 
sidered  in  debt  to  their  former  masters,  to  the  amount  of  the  money  far 
which  they  might  have  been  sold  before  emancipation,  and  they  wer* 
obliged  to  remain  on  the  plantations  and  labour  as  formerly,  till  ther 
had  paid  that  debt  by  their  labour  ;  and  a  police  system  was  establish  • 
ed  to  enforce  this  regulation.  The  amount  of  it  was,  that  the  lat»* 
secured  to  them  the  privilege  of  buying  their  freedom,  which  tha,' 
generally  accomplished  in  the  course  of  TWELVE  YEARS  !" 

If  this  is  what  Mr.  Jay  calls  "instantaneous  and  uncondition?,.. 
emancipation,"  we  should  regard  it  only  as  another  "triumph  of  grad 
ualism. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  105 

hat  your  materials  for  making  this  chapter  were  insufficient, 
and  you  therefore  abruptly  terminate  it  by  a  reference  to  the 

c  Scenes  in  St.  Domingo,"  and  promise  in  the  next  chapter  to 
;'  dispel  the  ignorance"  which  you  say  extensively  prevails  on 
this  subject,  and  confirm  the  truth  of  the  safety  of  immediate 
emancipation.  I  say  nothing  of  the  modest  insinuation  that  the 
history  of  St.  Domingo,  is  a  subject  on  which  so  "  extensive 
ignorance  prevails,"  that  you  are  called  upon  and  prepared  to 
"  dispel"  it. 

I  suppose  that  you  will  not  maintain  this  charge  of  ignorance 
against  the  venerable  Clarkson,  but  will  admit  that  he  knew 
nearly  as  much  in  relation  to  emancipation  in  St.  Domingo  as 
yourself.  Let  me  direct  your  attention  to  his  testimony  then, 
merely  premising  that  he  contended  for  a  "preparatory 
school"  which  fitted  the  slaves  "  by  degrees  for  making  a  good 
use  of  their  liberty."  And  adds  his  testimony  in  favour  of 
gradual  emancipation,  and  utterly  disclaims  the  project  of  im 
mediate  abolition  in  the  following  words. 

"  I  never  stated  that  our  West  Indian  slaves  were  to  be  eman 
cipated  suddenly,  but  BY  DEGREES.  I  always,  on  the  other 
hand,  took  it  for  granted,  that  they  were  to  have  a  preparatory 
school  also."  Nor  does  that  venerable  philanthropist  and  friend 
of  the  African  race,  refer  to  a  single  example  to  show  the  de 
sirableness  of  "  sudden"  emancipation. 

The  following  paragraph  is  from  an  excellent  sermon  by  the 
Rev.  Joseph  Tracy,  and  the  extracts  are  made  from  Mr.  Clark- 
son's  thoughts. 

"  In  February,  1794,  the  directory  passed  a  decree  for  the 
abolition  of  slavery  in  the  colonies.  Now  notice  the  conditions 
of  this  emancipation.  1.  '  The  labourers  were  obliged  to  hire 
themselves  to  their  masters,  for  not  less  than  a  year ;  at  the 
end  of  which,  but  not  before,  they  might  quit  the  service  and 
engage  with  others.'  2.  *  They  were  to  receive  a  third  part  of 
the  produce  of  the  estate,  as  a  recompense  for  their  labour.'  3. 
After  Toussaint,  a  negro,  came  into  power,  about  the  end  of 
1796,  he  '  took  away  from  every  master  the  use  of  the  whip, 
and  of  the  chain,  and  of  every  other  instrument  of  correction, 
either  by  himself  or  his  own  order :  he  took  away,  in  fact,  all 
power  of  arbitrary  punishment.'  He  increased  the  term  of  ser- 


106  LETTERS  TO  THE 

vice  from  one  year  to  five  years,  and  reduced  the  compensation 
from  one  third  to  one  fourth  of  the  produce.  He  '  succeeded  in 
making  the  black  labourers  return  to  the  plantations,  there  to 
resume  the  drudgery  of  cultivation.'  Notice  the  words  return 
and  resume.  It  appears,  then,  that  the  negroes,  after  what  is 
called  their  emancipation,  were  obliged  to  work  for  the  planters, 
at  first  without  the  privilege  of  choosing  their  masters,  and  al 
ways  at  a  price  fixed  by  others,  and  till  the  time  of  Toussaint, 
were  liable  to  be  driven  to  their  labours  by  the  whip  or  some 
( other  instrument  of  punishment,'  applied  at  the  discretion  01 
their  employers  ;  and  the  result  was  such,  that  Toussaint  was 
thought  to  do  wonders,  when  he  made  them  return  to  the  plan 
tations  and  resume  their  '  drudgery.'  Does  this  prove  '  the 
safety,  practicability,  and  expediency  of  immediate  emancipa 
tion  ?-'  And  do  those  among  us,  who  advocate  immediate  eman  • 
cipation,  mean  that  our  slaves  should  immediately  be  put  intc 
the  condition  just  described?"  « 

Here  then  it  is  demonstrated,  that  if  all  you  say  in  relation 
to  the  scenes  of  St.  Domingo,  be  admitted,  so  far  from  being,  as 
you  pretend,  a  "  glorious  demonstration  of  the  perfect  safety  of 
immediate  and  unconditional  emancipation,"  it  furnishes  irre 
fragable  evidence  against  your  doctrine,  since,  in  this  case,  the 
abolition  was  both  "  gradual  and  conditional." 

Mr.  Tracy  proceeds : — 

"  Another  case  mentioned  by  Clarkson  is  that  of  the  slaves 
in  Colombia,  South  America,  where  a  decree  was  passed,  July 
19,  1821,  giving  freedom  to  all  slaves  who  had  served  in  the 
armies  of  the  republic,  and  providing  that  all  born  after  the 
date  of  the  decree  should  be  free  at  the  age  of  eighteen.  This 
is  gradual  emancipation,  again,  on  the  same  principle  adopted 
in  New  York. 

"  The  last  case  mentioned  by  Clarkson,  is  that  of  the  Hon. 
Joshua  Steele,  of  Barbadoes,  of  which  he  says,  'It  took  him  six 
years  to  bring  his  negroes  to  the  state  of  vassalage  described, 
or  to  that  state  from  whence  he  was  sure  that  they  might  be 
transferred  without  danger,  in  no  distant  time,  to  the  rank  K 
free  men,  if  it  should  be  thought  desirable.'  '  Immediate  abo  - 
lition,'  truly  ! 

"  So  far,  then,  not  a  single  instance  is  found,  of  the  l  imme 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  10"* 

diate  emancipation'  of  all  the  slaves  of  any  country.  In  every 
nstance  brought  forward  by  the  advocates  of  that  doctrine,  thev 
were  emancipated,  not  'suddenly,'  but  by  'degrees,'  as  Mr 
^larkson  maintains  they  ought  to  be.  Even  now,  in  England, 
a  strong  effort  has  been  made  to  procure  '  immediate  emancipa- 
'on.'  They  must  all  be  made  free  in  a  moment;  but  accord- 
ng  to  the  bill  which  the  friends  of  that  measure  have  carried 
through  Parliament,  that  moment  is  to  be  several  years  long. 
Why  is  this  ?  Emancipation,  we  are  told,  ought  not  to  be  gra 
dual.  The  demands  of  justice  require  that  it  be  done  linstan- 
ter.'  Accordingly,  a  bill  is  brought  in,  which  enacts,  that  it 
shall  be  done  in  twelve  years.  If  gentlemen  mean,  emancipation 
in  twelve  years,  why  do  they  not  say  so  ?  Why  agitate  the  coun 
try,  by  calling  it  c  immediate  ?'  And  why  compel  us  to  under 
stand  them  literally,  by  using  arguments,  which,  if  they  proved 
any  thing,  would  prove  that  it  ought  to  be,  strictly,  imme 
diate  ? 

"  Indeed,  it  does  not  seem,  that  any  body  seriously  means  to 
oractice  on  the  theory  of  immediate  emancipation.  It  is  used 
merely  for  the  sake  of  producing  excitement.  The  Jacobini 
cal  argument  is  the  shortest,  and  most  exciting  to  shallow 
thinkers,  of  any  yet  invented.  It  proves,  however,  if  it  proves 
any  thing,  that  slaves  ought  to  be  emancipated, — as  Clarkson 
says  they  ought  not, — 'suddenly,'  and  without  any  'preparatory 
school.'  And  it  proves,  with  equal  force,  that  all  slaves,  and 
all  women,  and  all  children,  should  at  once  take  part,  equally 
with  others,  in  the  civil  government  of  the  country.  And  then 
it  proves,  that  if  any  of  them  choose  not  to  obey  the  laws  of 
tnat  government,  they  have  an  'unalienable  right'  to  set  them 
at  defiance." 

Your  next  chapter  is  on  the  subject  of  emancipation  in  the 
British  West  Indies,  which,  although  called  by  your  fellow  la- 
oourer,  Garrison,  nothing  but  a  "triumph  of  gradualism;"  yet 
vou  refer  to  it,  as  in  the  former  cases,  to  prove  that  "  the  eman 
cipation  most  conducive  to  the  safety  and  happiness  of  the 
whites,  is  immediate  and  unconditional,"  and  declare,  that  as 
ihe  "  apprenticeship  system"  was  adopted  "  contrary  to  their 
advice,  and  is  inconsistent  with  the  doctrines  they  profess," 
they  are  not  responsible  for  its  consequences.  It  is  lamentable, 


106  LETTERS  TO  THE 

indeed,  that  the  "responsibility"  of  abolitionists  could  not 
iiave  been  secured  for  the  "  safety"  of  the  colonies,  by  the  Bii. 
ish  government,  when  this  vast  advantage  might  have  been  ac 
quired  by  taking  their  advice  and  adopting  the  doc? lines  tWy 
profess  !  I  suppose,  however,  this  important  measure  was  in 
cidentally  overlooked  by  the  British  government,  in  their  efforts 
to  conciliate  the  West  India  proprietors,  and  hence  the  error 
was  committed,  of  making  the  emancipation  gradual,  instead 
of  immediate,  and  the  right  of  "  property,"  unfortunately  ac 
knowledged,  by  the  provision  for  "  compensation  to  the 
owners." 

But  you  next  attempt  to  urge  objections  against  gradual 
abolition,  "  on  the  ground  of  mere  political  expediency,"  alleg 
ing  that  while  this  process  was  unexceptionable  in  New  Yor^ 
yet  it  would  be  dangerous  in  South  Carolina,  "  for  the  weight 
of  the  objections  to  gradual  emancipation,"  you  tell  us,  is  "pro 
portioned  to  the  number  of  slaves  to  be  emancipated,"  compa 
red  with  the  white  population.  But  you  lose  sight  of  the  rea 
sons  which  influenced  John  Jay,  that  profound  and  sagacious 
statesman,  to  labour  in  behalf  of  gradual  abolition  in  New 
York,*  where  there  were  so  few  slaves,  and  which  prevented 
him,  even  under  these  circumstances,  from  ever  dreaming  of 
immediate  abolition.  And  if  those  reasons  had  any  weight  in 
New  York,  by  what  process  of  sophistry  can  you  deceive  your 
self  into  the  belief,  that  it  would  be  "  safe  and  happy"  to  effect* 
"  instant  abolition"  in  South  Carolina. 

You  significantly  ask  "what  would  become  of  the  10,000 
slaves,"  if  so  many  were  annually  liberated  in  that  state,  on  this 
plan  of  gradual  abolition  ?  And  I  ask  you  in  turn,  what  wouid 
become  of  forty  times  that  number,  if  South  Carolina  were  to 
issue  the  decree  of  immediate  and  unconditional  emancipation  '} 
As  you  call  the  former  an  "  extravagant  supposition,"  "vision 
ary  in  the  extreme,"  by  what  epithet  would  you  designate  the 
latter  ?  And  yet  you  say,  that  gradual  emancipation  is  so  dan- 


*  It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  the  bill  for  immediately  abolishing 
slavery  in  the  state  of  New  York,  and  which  was  passed  in  1817,  was 
introduced  into  the  legislature  by  President  Duer,  the  .respecied 
president  of  the  New  York  City  Colonization  Society. 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  109 

gerous,  that  the  only  alternative  is  "  immediate  emancipation 
or  continued  slavery."  You  forget  the  "  colonization  delu 
sion,"  or  have  probably  persuaded  yourself,  that  with  the  pub 
lication  of  your  book,  the  epitaph  is  written  for  that  powerful 
institution,  whose  funeral  orgies  were  celebrated  at  the  first  an 
niversary  of  the  American  Anti-slavery  Society,  in  May  last. 
Know,  then,  that  there  is  another  and  a  better  alternative,  and 
learn  from  the  Book  of  Revelation,  that  in  the  Divine  economy 
for  every  moral  evil  in  the  universe,  there  is  an  adequate  reme 
dy.  And  believe  me,  when  I  assure  you,  that  it  is  the  deliberate 
conviction  of  many  of  the  most  exalted  intellects,  and  the  most 
benevolent  hearts  in  this  nation,  that  the  American  Coloniza 
tion  Society  is  destined  in  the  order  of  Divine  Providence  to 
triumph  over  every  obstacle,  and  prove  itself  the  dispenser  of 
liberty  and  religion,  in  interminable  blessing  upon  two  worlds. 

The  dangers  of  slavery  on  which  you  expatiate  in  your  last 
chapter,  are  fully  appreciated  by  the  Colonization  Society,  and 
this  is  a  consideration  among  others,  which  has  been  urged  by 
its  friends  from  the  beginning,  in  favour  of  this  institution  ; 
while  at  the  same  time,  it  is  one,  which  ought  to  palsy  the 
tongue  and  wither  the  hand  that  should  be  employed  to  magnify 
or  increase  those  dangers.  In  my  next  letter,  I  shall  briefly  ex 
amine  this  subject. 

With  due  respect. 

Yours, 


110  LETTERS  TO  THE 


LETTER  XV. 

SIR, 

IN  this  concluding  letter  I  invite  your  attention  to  the  subject 
of  "  foreign  interference"  with  the  subject  of  American  slavery  ; 
the  propriety  of  which,  you  not  only  justify,  but  advocate,  since 
you  attribute  the  resistance  felt  and  expressed,  against  British 
emissaries,  to  national  and  criminal  "pride!" 

Indeed,  this  defence  of  "  foreign  interference,"  was  necessary 
on  your  part,  as  the  avowed  champion  of  the  American  Anti- 
Slavery  Society,  because  of  the  position  that  institution  *ow 
occupies  before  the  American  community.  Already  have  two 
British  agents  been  employed  for  the  purpose  of  enlightening 
our  citizens  in  relation  to  their  duty  to  the  coloured  population 
of  our  country.  The  society  cannot  enlist  agents  in  sufficient 
numbers,  or  of  sufficient  popularity,  in  our  own  country,  and 
therefore,  they  import  British  agitators,  in  the  capacity  of  anti- 
slavery  lecturers.  The  most  distinguished  of  these,  is  Gewge 
Thompson,  sometimes  called  Rev.,  and  at  others,  Esq. ;  who 
is  peregrinating  through  the  northern  and  eastern  states,  where 
there  are  no  slaves,  and  to  whom  allusion  has  been  made  in  a 
former  letter.  Your  defence  of  "  foreign  interference,"  may 
probably  be  regarded  as  a  kind  of  apology  for  this  feature  in  the 
anti-slavery  tactics,  though  all  this  will  fail  in  protecting  him 
from  the  scorn  and  indignation  of  every  American,  whose  spirit 
of  patriotism  is  not  extinguished  by  the  esprit  du  corps,  which 
is  characteristic  of  abolitionism. 

But  it  seems,  you  would  not  only  have  your  countrymen  lis 
ten  to  him  and  other  foreign  demagogues,  but  you  attempt  to 
intimidate  the  slaveholders,  by  foreign  opinions  and  British 
threats.  And  can  you  deceive  yourself  by  the  vain  hope,  that 
you  can  frighten  Americans  by  the  anathemas  of  foreigners,  or 
bully  them  into  political  orthodoxy  by  British  doctrines ?  Why 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  Ill 

else  did  you  introduce  the  "  coarse  invective"  of  that  great  agi 
tator  Daniel  O'Connell,  together  with  other  British  "  arguments 
addressed  to  the  understandings  and  consciences  of  American 
slaveholders  ?"  I  confess,  I  blush  for  your  degeneracy  from 
the  principles  of  your  illustrious  sire,  while  I  make  the  follow 
ing  extracts  from  your  book. 

"  Mr.  Buckingham,  member  of  parliament,  lately  asserted  at 
a  public  meeting  : — 

"  The  greater  proportion  of  the  people  of  EnglandDRM AND 
not  merely  emancipation,  but  the  immediate  emancipation  of 
the  slaves,  in  whatever  quarter  of  the  world  they  may  be 
found." 

When  England  becomes  mistress  of  the  world,  her  "  people" 
may  demand  what  they  please  ;  but  she  and  they  know  Ame 
rica  too  well,  to  press  this  demand  in  this  "quarter  of  the 
world  !"  There  is  too  much  of  the  spirit  of  '76  and  of  old  John 
Jay  yet  lingering  among  our  countrymen,  to  withhold  the  ex 
pression  of  their  indignation,  at  the  insult  which  the  repetition 
of  such  language  conveys. 

But  again  I  quote  from  your  book  another  British  argu 
ment. 

ic  Daniel  O'Connell,  shortly  before  the  abolition  of  slavery  in 
the  British  dominions,  declared  in  public  : — 

"  The  West  Indies  will  be  obliged  to  grant  emancipation, 
and  then  we  will  turn  to  America,  and  REQUIRE  eman 
cipation  !" 

Prodigious!  And  the  American  Anti- Slavery  Society  and 
its  British  agent,  George  Thompson,  I  suppose,  are  the  chosen 
instrumentality  of  Daniel  O'Connell,  now  that  he  "  turns  to 
America,  and  requires  emancipation."  You,  sir,  and  he,  and 
they,  will  require  it  in  vain.  Nay,  by  this  very  attitude  and 
union  with  such  agitators,  you  close  the  southern  ear,  and  hard 
en  the  southern  heart,  and  blast  the  hopes  of  all  who  labour 
and  pray  for  emancipation.  Southern  hearts  and  southern  con 
sciences  are  accessible  to  moral  suasion ;  but  while  southern 
Americans  yield  much  to  courtesy,  they  will  submit  nothing  to 
intimidation.  Nor  will  they  permit  interference  or  dictation  from 
any  of  the  other  states  of  this  confederacy,  as  the  history  of 
this  nation  has  amply  shown.  Much  less  will  they  suffer  fo- 


1 12  LETTERS  TO  THE 

reigners  to  meddle  with  their  vested  rights,  or  Englisnmen  to 
demand  or  require  any  thing  at  their  hands.  Having  aided 
during  our  revolutionary  struggle  in  breaking  the  British  yoke, 
their  necks  will  never  bend  to  receive  another.  I  marvel  that 
you  did  not  know  them  better  than  to  quote  such  instances  of 
the  consummate  arrogance  of  John  Bull,  in  reading  a  homily 
on  emancipation  to  American  slaveholders. 

But  the  following  disgraceful  sentiment  of  O'Connell,  you 
introduce  in  this  connexion,  to  teach  Americans  the  nature  of 
British  "  public  opinion,"  against  which  you  say,  "  our  fleets 
and  armies  will  be  of  no  avail."  And  you  even  threaten  the 
citizens  of  the  south  that  "when  they  visit  Europe  they  will 
not  be  admitted  to  the  usual  courtesies  of  social  intercourse," 
because  of  the  "  temper  of  the  British  populace."  But  let  us 
attend  to  your  extract  and  authority. 

"  When  an  AMERICAN  comes  into  society,"  said  Daniel 
O'Connell,  in  a  numerous  assembly,  "  he  will  be  asked,  '  Are 
you  one  of  the  THIEVES  !  or  are  you  an  honest  man  ?  If  you 
are  an  honest  man,  then  you  have  given  liberty  to  your  slaves  j 
if  you  are  among  the  THIEVES,  the  sooner  you  take  the  out 
side  of  the  house  the  better  !'  " 

And  here  let  me  ask  you,  sir,  whether  this  is  one  of  the  "ar 
guments"  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society,  "  addressed  to  the  un 
derstanding  and  conscience  of  slaveholders  to  persuade  them 
to  emancipate  !"  Is  this  one  of  the  means  you  are  using  to 
promote  abolition  ?  Is  this  the  gospel  which  you  are  bound  to 
"  GO  !  and  preach  to  every  creature  ?"  And  can  you  persuade 
yourself,  that  a  book  containing  such  language,  and  exhibiting 
such  a  spirit,  comports  with  the  character  of  an  American 
citizen,  much  less  an  American  Christian  ?  such  as  is  the  Hon. 
William  Jay  ? 

I  am  shocked  at  the  state  of  mind  and  feeling  to  which  abo 
litionism  has  reduced  you,  sir,  when  you  here  record,  page  301, 
your  expectation,  and  evidently  your  desire,  that  this  temper, 
which  denominates  Americans  THIEVES,  in  the  coarse  invec 
tive  of  O'Connell,  "  will,  in  time,  become  the  temper  of  all 
Europe,  and  indeed,  of  all  the  world  /"  Pardon  me  when  I 
say,  that  if  your  prediction  be  ever  fulfilled,  and  the  temper  of 
Daniel  O'Connell  be  the  temper  of  all  Europe  and  of  all  the 


HON.  WILLIAM   JAY.  113 

world,  then  will  civilization  degenerate  into  barbarism,  and 
Christianity  will  have  left  the  earth  for  a  higher,  holier  abode. 

If  this  is  to  be,  as  you  tell  us,  the  result  of  "  the  progress  of 
liberal  principles,"  in  the  name  of  all  that  is  rational  in  com 
mon  sense,  in  the  name  of  all  that  is  sacred  in  religion,  I  ask, 
whence  are  those  principles  derived?  Daniel  O'Connell,  the 
champion  of  "  liberal  principles"  forsooth  ?  And  in  the  pro 
gress  of  these  liberal  principles  "when  an  American  comes 
into  society  in  England,"  he  is  to  be  asked,  "  are  you  one  of 
the  thieves  ?"  This  may  be  the  design  and  tendency  of  the 
anti-slavery  "principles,"  but  their  claim  to  being  "liberal" 
would  be  truly  questionable.  And  if  such  be  the  effect  of  the 
temper  of  the  British  populace,  from  such  "  liberal  principles," 
all  good  men  should  fervently  and  unitedly  pray,  "  Good  Lord 
deliver  us." 

It  is  painful  to  discover  that  as  you  proceed  toward  the  con 
clusion  of  your  "Inquiry,"  your  intemperate  sp hit  of  declama 
tion  in  no  measure  declines.  Hence  you  introduce  in  your  last 
chapter  the  couplet  of  "slaveholders  and  colonizationists^ 
who,  you  say,  "  delight  to  expatiate  on  the  danger  of  imme 
diate  emancipation,  and  to  represent  its  advocates  as  reckless 
incendiaries  ready  to  deluge  the  country  in  blood!"  In  no 
part  of  your  own  book  do  you  furnish  a  single  instance  in  which 
the  advocates  of  immediate  emancipation  are  so  represented, 
much  less  do  you  attempt  any  proof  that  colonizationists  delight 
in  such  representations.  When  the  rash  and  intemperate  pub 
lications  of  the  party,  and  the  violent  calumnies  of  the  entire 
south,  are  rebuked  by  showing  their  pernicious  tendency,  and 
when  the  dangers  which  are  justly  apprehended  from  such  mea 
sures  are  referred  toby  colonizationists,  it  is  done  with  pain  and 
mortification,  instead  of  "  delight,"  as  your  own  quotations  from 
colonizationists  amply  demonstrate. 

The  dangers  to  be  apprehended  from  the  continuance,  the 
increase,  and  perpetuity  of  slavery  in  the  United  States,  is  a 
theme  on  which  the  Colonization  Society  has  dwelt  with  far 
more  emphasis  and  effect,  than  is  discoverable  in  all  the  writ 
ings  of  abolitionists,  your  own  included.  To  be  sure,  the  spirit, 
temper,  and  object  for  which  they  refer  to  these  dangers,  is  vastly 
different  from  yours,  and  hence  they  have  done  so  in  strong 


114  LETTERS  TO   THE 

language,  without  doing  mischief  or  giving  offence  ;  and  in  this 
respect  there  is  a  wide  difference.  .  You  refer  to  them,  accom 
panying  your  reference  with  bitter  invective,  and  for  the  pur 
pose  of  intimidating  the  south  to  immediate  and  unconditional 
emancipation ;  while  colonizationists  allude  to  them  with  ex 
pressions  of  sympathy  and  kindness,  and  with  the  design  of 
convincing  masters  of  the  policy  and  duly  of  gradual  abolition, 
and  preparation  for  ultimate  and  entire  abolition.  In  all  the 
writings  of  colonizationists  no  attempt  is  made  to  frighten 
slaveholders  by  such  language  as  you  employ  on  page  198, 
when  you  say  as  an  argument  in  favour  of  immediate  abolition, 

"  Before  they  refuse  to  retreat  from  the  VOLCANO  on  which 
they  are  standing,  let  them  look  into  the  terrific  crater  which 
yawns  beneath  them  /" 

The  following  paragraph  of  your  book  claims  a  specific  notice, 
as  it  affords  a  specimen  of  the  sophistry  by  which  your  self- 
complacency  is  inspired,  and  others  may  be  and  doubtless  are  se 
duced  from  their  principles,  and  misled  into  the  purest  fanaticism. 

"  But  it  is  demanded,  with  an  air  of  supercilious  triumph, 
what  have  northern  men  to  do  with  slavery,  and  what  right 
have  they  to  interfere  with  the  domestic  institutions  of  the 
south  ?  And  is  this  question  addressed  to  the  followers  of  Him 
who  commanded  his  disciples  to  '  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach 
the  gospel  to  every  creature  ?'  As  well  might  it  be  asked  of  the 
Christians  of  America,  what  have  they  to  do  with,  the  religion 
of  Brahma;  what  right  have  they  to  interfere  to  rescue  the 
widow  from  the  burning  pile,  or  the  devotee  from  the  wheels 
of  Juggernaut  ?  Christians  are  no  less  bound  by  the  injunction 
to  '  do  good  unto  all  men,'  to  endeavour  by  lawful  means  to 
break  the  fetters  of  the  slave,  than  to  deliver  the  victim  of  Pagan 
superstition." 

So,  then,  the  interference  with  the  subject  of  slavery,  as 
sanctioned  by  their  laws,  so  justly  complained  of  in  the  south, 
is  here  attempted  to  be  justified  by  an  appeal  to  the  Scripture^. 
And  a  comparison  is  profanely  instituted  between  the  inculca 
tion  of  anti-slavery  doctrines  and  the  preaching  of  the  gospe^ 
of  Christ ;  while  the  civil,  political,  and  domestic  institutions 
of  a  large  portion  of  the  United  States,  are  compared  to  the 
superstitions  of  paganism.  But  where  is  the  warrant  from 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  115 

Scripture  for  preaching  against  paganism  only  in  Christian  coun 
tries,  and  creating  hostility  towards  pagan  superstition  in  those 
countries  where  paganism  is  not ;  and  what  widow  would  be 
rescued  from  the  funeral  pile  by  preaching  in  China  instead  oi 
Hindostan ;  and  what  victim  would  be  snatched  from  the  wheels 
of  Juggernaut  by  anti-pagan  lectures  delivered  in  New-York  ? 
And  if  "immediate  abolitionism"  be  the  gospel  personified, 
as  you  seem  to  imagine,  why  do  you  not  fulfil  the  command 
ment  you  unfortunately  quote,  "  GO  ye  into  all  the  world,  and 
preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature !"  It  is  an  idle  conceit  to 
suppose  that  standing  still  in  the  north,  and  preaching  this 
gospel,  is  to  GO  into  the  south;  and  if  the  doctrines  of  anti- 
slavery  be,  as  you  pretend,  the  very  essence  of  the  gospel,  its 
preachers  are  bound  to  GO  into  all  the  world.*  It  is  no  excuse 
to  say  they  should  be  persecuted,  for  He  who  commands  has 
said,  "  I  send  you  as  lambs  among  wolves  ;"  and  still  He  says 
GO,  and  they  who  hear  and  obey  can  in  no  wise  be  released 
from  the  obligation.  But  the  truth  is,  that  no  one  in  the  ranks 
of  anti-slavery,  whatever  he  may  profess,  believes  that  it  is  the 
gospel,  else  he  would  go  and  preach  where  slavery  is.  Indeed 
you  admit  it,  for  you  say,  "  the  obligation  is  imperative,  and 
they  who  duly  respect  its  authority  will  not  be  deterred  by 
violence  or  denunciation  from  obeying  its  monitions."  That 
no  one  among  the  hosts  of  abolitionism  act  upon  this  "  impera 
tive  obligation?  is  a  practical  proof  that  they  are  all  skeptics 
or  unbelievers  in  their  profession  of  this  gospel,  else  some  one 
would  say,  "neither  count  I  my  life  dear  to  me,"  "I  am  ready 
to  go  to  prison  or  to  death,  for  a  testimony  to  the  truth." 

*  Mr.  Jay  seems  to  deceive  himself  into  the  belief  that  he  fully  dis 
charges  the  "  imperative  obligation  "  of  "  GOING  into  all  the  world  to 
preach"  this  gospel,  by  quietly  sitting  in  his  study  in  Bedford,  West 
Chester  County,  New-York,  and  writing  an  anti-slavery  book.  Such 
<c missionaries"  are  numerous  in  the  anti-slavery  ranks,  and  if  the 
victims  of  pagan  superstition  and  idolatry  in  heathen  lands  can  be 
rescued  by  such  "missionary  labours,"  Drs.  Coke,  Carey,  and  Mor 
rison,  have  spent  their  lives  in  vain,  and  Gutzlaff  might  be  forthwith 
recalled  from  China,  and  the  salvation  of  the  heathen  be  accomplished 
by  labours,  dispensed  without  danger,  or  sacrifice  of  means  or  of  life. 
Alas  !  such  preaching  against  paganism  would  accomplish  all  that  is 
desirable,  only  as  soon  as  Mr.  Jay's  book,  and  preaching  his  gospel  in 
the  north,  will  efiect  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  south. 


116  LETTERS   TO   THE 

That  such  is  the  spirit  and  practice  of  true  gospel  ministers, 
you  will  not  question,  I  am  sure.  The  missionary  character  of 
the  church  of  Christ  abounds  in  examples  of  self-sacrifice  to 
which  the  gospel  constrains  its  ambassadors,  and  faith  is  mighty 
to  compel  to  the  discharge  of  this  "  imperative  obligation." 
Indeed  the  entire  south  is  now  a  missionary  field,  and  the  mil 
lions  of  slaves,  for  whose  temporal  bondage  your  commissera- 
tion  is  declared,  and  for  the  "  instant  emancipation"  of  whose 
bodies  you  so  zealously  contend,  are  included  in  that  world  for 
whom  Christ  died,  and  to  whom  he  directed  his  gospel  ministers 
to  GO.  But  while  anti-slavery  preachers,  who  have  truly 
"  another  gospel,"  are  deterred  from  going  by  apprehensions  of 
"violence  and  denunciation,"  the  true  missionaries  of  the 
cross,  taking  their  lives  in  their  hands,  do  go,  and  will  continue 
to  go,  preaching  deliverance  to  the  captives,  and  the  "  opening  of 
the  prison  doors  to  them  that  are  bound."  And  if  they  cannot 
deliver  their  bodies  from  involuntary  servitude,  they  will  labour 
and  pray  for  their  spiritual  emancipation,  that  they  may  enjty 
the  liberty  of  the  gospel,  and  become  "free  men  and  wo 
men  in  Christ  Jesus."  The  Missionary  Society  of  the  Metho 
dist  Episcopal  Church  alone,  has  scores  of  missionaries,  living 
and  dying  in  this  work  of  preaching  the  gospel,  exclusively  to 
the  slaves,  and  hundreds  of  the  ministers  of  that  church  are 
labouring  in  those  sections  of  our  country  where  a  large  pro 
portion  of  their  congregations  are  slaves.  And  this  church  has 
no  less  than  seventy  thousand  church  members,  who  maintain 
the  Christian  character  by  their  walk  and  conversation,  among 
these  slaves,  who,  you  say,  are  "  compelled  to  live  without  God, 
and  die  without  hope  ;"  and  thus,  by  one  fell  swoop,  you  doom 
them  all,  and  their  inhuman  masters,  to  endless  perdition! 
Besides  these,  there  are  very  many  ministers  of  other  denomi 
nations,  who  are  spending  their  lives  in  this  work  of  preaching 
the  gospel  to  the  slaves.  You  have  probably  seen  the  "  Journal 
of  a  Missionary  to  the  Negroes  in  the  State  of  Georgia,"  which 
has  been  published  in  the  New- York  Observer,  and  other  reli 
gious  papers.  That  missionary  is  himself  a  slaveholder.  He 
is  devoting  his  time,  his  wealth,  his  life,  to  the  work  of  promo-N 
ting  among  the  slaves,  that  godliness  which  is  "profitable  to  all 
things  having  the  promise  of  this  life,  and  that  which  is  to 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  117 

come."  There  are  other  slaveholders,  men  of  wealth,  of  talent, 
of  learning,  who  have  consecrated  themselves  to  this  work ;  and 
planters  are  numerous,  who  welcome  these  men  to  their  planta 
tions,  and  assemble  their  slaves,  to  be  instructed  by  them,  and 
to  unite  with  them  in  the  worship  of  God.  Extensive  associa 
tions  of  planters  are  formed,  for  the  purpose  of  giving  system 
and  energy  to  these  operations. 

'c  The  late  revivals  of  religion  in  the  southern  states  have  pro 
duced  a  mighty  influence  in  this  direction;  an  influence  of 
which,  at  the  south,  few  are  ignorant,  and  the  existence  of 
which  none  dispute.  You  may  learn  the  fact  from  their  political 
newspapers  even.  Men  there  are  beginning  to  feel  extensively, 
that  the  doctrine  of  our  text  is  true  ;  that  God  '  hath  made  of 
one  blood  all  nations  of  men, — that  they  should  seek  the 
Lord ;' — that  he  has  given  them  one  common  nature,  and  one 
common  gospel,  to  which  all  ought  to  have  access.  They  are 
beginning,  more  and  more,  to  act  on  this  principle  ;  and  it  will 
have  the  same  effect  which  it  had  when  Paul  preached  it,  and 
men  embraced,  it  at  Athens  and  at  Rome  ; — it  will  abolish  sla 
very.  If  slave  laws  remain  as  they  are,  it  will  render  them  in- 
operativej  for  it  will  remove  all  occasion  for  the  use  of  them. 
If  laws  need  to  be  altered,  it  will  alter  them.  It  will  prove 
the  wisdom  of  God,  and  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,  not 
only  to  the  individuals  who  receive  it,  but  to  the  community 
which  it  pervades/'* 

The  following  appropriate  extract,  from  the  sermon  to  which 
allusion  has  just  been  made,  is  so  much  better  expressed  than  I 
can  hope  to  do  it,  that  I  here  avail  myself  of  it  as  worthy  of 
the  excellent  and  benevolent  author,  to  whose  head  and  heart 
these  sentiments  do  equal  honour. 

"  If  it  be  conceded,  that  slaves  are  not  a  part  of  those  for 
whom  Christ  died,  and  do  not  need  to  be  saved  as  we  do  '  by 
the  foolishness  of  preaching,'  then  it  will  be  impossible  to 
prove  that  they  have  any  more  rights  than  any  other  animals 
for  which  Christ  did  not  die,  or  that  they  have  any  more  claim 
to  any  emancipation  at  all,  either  immediate  or  remote,  than 

*  Rev,  Mr.  Tracy's  Sermon. 


118  LETTERS  TO  THE 

our  oxen  and  horses  have.  But,  if  they  are  a  part  of  the  human 
race  ;  if  the  Saviour  did  indeed  shed  his  blood  for  them  as  well 
as  for  us ;  if  faith  in  that  gospel  of  his  grace,  which  they  can 
not  '  believe'  till  they  '  hear'  it,  be  necessary  to  save  them  from 
eternal  perdition,  and  capable  of  raising  them  to  perfect  and 
endless  felicity  ;  and  if,  like  other  men,  they  are  not  immortal, 
but  are  actually  dying — going  into  the  eternal  world,  whether 
prepared  or  not,  every  day  and  every  hour ;  then  certainly  it 
becomes  us  to  lose  no  time  in  sending  them  the  gospel.  They 
need  the  gospel,  more  than  all  things  else ;  as  much  more,  as 
hell  is  worse  than  their  present  condition,  as  heaven  is  better 
than  the  condition  of  a  free  negro  in  the  United  States,  and  as 
eternity  is  longer  than  human  life.  Give  them,  then,  the  gos 
pel.  Let  those  who  can,  encourage,  and  aid,  and  sustain  the 
preachers.  Let  those  who  can,  whether  from  the  pulpit,  the 
press,  or  in  any  other  way,  urge  upon  planters  the  duty  of 
having  the  gospel  preached  to  them.  And  let  those  who  c£n 
do  nothing  else,  if  any  such  there  be,  pray  that  it  may  be 
preached  to  them.  Let  Christians,  at  the  north  and  at  the 
south,  give  to  this  object,  the  conversion  of  the  slaves  to 
Christ,  the  prominence  of  which  it  is  worthy ;  let  them  think 
of  it,  and  pray  for  it,  and,  as  they  can  find  opportunity, 
labour  for  it,  in  proportion  to  its  worth,  and  as  the  Spirit  of 
Christ  dictates,  and  they  will  be  converted ;  their  masters  wilZ 
labour  for  their  conversion,  and  for  their  complete  sanctification, 
and  God  will  bless  their  labours,  and  the  work  will  be  done. 

"  Now  we  ask,  is  it  wise,  is  it  kind,  is  it  Christian,  to  neglect 
this  great  object,  and  to  expend  all  our  strength,  and  all  our 
zeal,  and  endeavour  to  make  all  others  expend  all  their  strength 
and  their  zeal,  on  an  object  which,  however  important,  is  infi 
nitely  less  important  to  the  negroes  than  this?  Or,  if  attention 
to  this  object  be  not  wholly  omitted,  is  it  wise,  or  kind,  or 
Christian,  to  draw  off  the  attention  of  the  friends  of  the  negroes 
from  it,  by  making  any  other  object  more  prominent  ?  Would 
Paul  have  done  it  ?  Would  Christ  ?  Should  you  do  it,  and^ 
do  it  successfully ;  and  should  the  result  be,  that  all  the  slaves 
in  the  nation  should  be  emancipated,  and  that  thousands  should 
die  in  their  sins,  who,  but  for  the  direction  which  you  gave  to 
the  public  mind,  might  have  been  saved, — do  you  think  you 


HON.  WILLIAM  JAY.  119 

should  rejoice  in  it,  when  standing  with  them  before  the  judg 
ment  seat  of  Christ  ? 

"  If  you  say,  your  object  is  to  bring  the  whites  to  repentance 
for  the  sin  of  suffering  them  to  remain  in  civil  bondage  ;  I  ask, 
is  it  right  to  do  this,  by  withdrawing  their  minds  from  the  still 
greater  sin,  of  suffering  them  to  remain  in  bondage  to  Satan? 

"  If  it  be  said,  that  we  must  procure  their  release  from  civil 
bondage,  before  the  gospel  can  be  successfully  preached  to  them ; 
what  is  this,  but  to  disparage  the  gospel  of  Christ,  as  an  insuf 
ficient  remedy  for  the  miseries  of  the  human  race, — as  not 
adapted  to  the  wants  of  men,  in  some  of  the  circumstances  in 
which  they  may  be  placed  ? 

"  Is  it  not  plain  that  men  who  take  such  a  course,  are  not  as 
they  should  be ; — that  they  have  given  to  the  temporal  an  as 
cendency  over  the  spiritual  in  their  own  minds,  for  which  they 
ought  to  be  penitent  ?  And  when  we  remember  that  the  right 
course  would  bring  to  those  now  in  slavery,  inevitably,  safely, 
and  pleasantly  to  all  concerned,  all  the  temporal  benefits  which 
these  men  are  endeavouring  in  vain  to  secure  to  them  by  the 
wrong  course — is  not  the  imperfection  of  their  wisdom  as  ma 
nifest  as  the  imperfection  of  their  piety  ? — I  mean  exactly  what 
I  say.  I  have  no  doubt  that  many  of  them  possess  both  wisdom 
and  piety  ;  but  both  are  imperfect,  and  here  is  a  striking  in 
stance  of  their  imperfection." 

Suffer  me,  sir,  affectionately  to  commend  the  foregoing  pious 
sentiments  to  your  calm  and  prayerful  reflections.  And  after 
you  shall  "pause,  reflect,  and  pray,"  ask  yourself  whether  in 
your  denunciations  against  slaveholding,  your  plea  in  behalf 
of  immediate  abolition,  and  your  crusade  against  colonization? 
you  do  not  neglect  the  "  weightier  matters  of  the  law  j"  and 
whether  your  zeal  has  not  got  the  better  of  your  discretion,  and 
blinded  your  moral  vision  to  the  "  more  excellent  way."  You 
and  I  are  hastening  to  the  judgment  of  the  great  day,  with  the 
millions  of  the  bond  and  free,  when  nought  but  "truth"  will 
be  able  to  stand.  The  question  between  us  is  not,  therefore, 
whether  you  or  I  be  the  abler  controversialist,  else  my  small 
measure  of  self-knowledge  would  have  restrained  my  pen. 
But  in  the  war  between  truth  and  error  we  are  both  committed 
for  eternity,  and  I,  therefore,  regard  self-sacrifice,  an  insignifi- 


120  *S  TO  THE  HON.  WILLIAM  JAY. 

cant  consideration.  The  truth  is  greater  than  us  both,  and  for 
the  part  we  take  in  the  present  controversy,  we  are  responsible 
here  and  hereafter.  Our  motives  are  infinitely  important  to 
ourselves,  in  view  of  both  worlds ;  and  while  I  humbly  make 
the  profession  of  a  sincere  and  conscientious  conviction  of  duty 
as  the  predominant  motive  in  this  correspondence,  I  withhold 
not  the  admission  of  an  equal  purity  of  motive  to  yourself. 
And  in  the  animadversions  I  have  made  upon  the  sentiments 
and  tendency  of  your  book,  let  me  assure  you  that  no  unkind 
feelings  to  yourself  have  mingled  in  this  effort  to  vindicate  a 
cause  which  I  believe  to  be  identified  with  the  present  and 
future  happiness  of  the  millions  who  inhabit  our  own  conti 
nent  and  that  of  Africa.  And  if  by  inadvertence,  any  word  or 
sentence  shall  have  escaped  my  notice  which  shall  wound  your 
feelings,  or  indicate  a  want  of  respect  to  your  Christian  cha 
racter,  let  it  be  imputed  to  the  imperfections  in  my  wisdom  or 
piety,  of  which  I  am  ever  conscious,  and  for  which  I  would  fafn 
repent.  My  aim  has  been,  however  imperfectly  performed,  to 
glorify  God,  and  overcome  error  with  truth,  nor  would  I  con 
sent  to  retain  a  syllable  here  which  "dying,  I  would  wish  to 
blot." 

With  prayer  that  we  may  both  be  led  into  the  right  way, 
and  that  the  truth  may  make  us  free,  I  subscribe  myself, 

With  due  respect. 

Yours,  &c. 


IETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

202  Main  Library 


OAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 

2 

3 

i 

5 

6 

ALL  BOOKS  MAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

Renewals  and  Recharges  may  be  made  4  days  prior  to  the  due  date. 

Books  may  be  Renewed  by  calling     642-3405. 

DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


MAY  07  I33U 

-     Ar.  ^-p 

'.'  i  j  u, 

rrn  ft  4  1991 

rLD  u  *x  i^  • 

• 

. 

f 

- 

s 

FORM  NO.  DD6 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKEL 
BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


GENERAL  LIBRARY   U.C.  BERKELEY 


600011=2507 


